Is the "Guile" license OSI approved?

Andy Tai lichengtai at
Fri Nov 30 01:10:42 UTC 2001

Given the history of Free Software and Open Source
(that Open Source is a marketing name (Bruce Perens)
or marketing program (Eric Raymond) for Free
Software), can there be any question that a software
license the Free Software Foundation published is not
Open Source?

FSF may never seek OSI approval for its licenses (the
source needs no approval from the derivative), but
implicitly any GNU software license is Open Source... 

--- Martin Wolters <martinw at> wrote:
> To whom it may concern:
> You can find a few open source projects on the web
> that use the so 
> called "guile license" which is the GPL + the
> following paragraph:
> >     As a special exception, if you link this
> library with other files
> >     to produce an executable, this library does
> not by itself cause
> >     the resulting executable to be covered by the
> GNU General Public
> >     License. This exception does not however
> invalidate any other
> >     reasons why the executable file might be
> covered by the GNU
> >     General Public License. 
> >
> Example project: 
> I expect, that software which uses this kind of
> license is still OSI 
> certified although the license does not appear on
> the list of OSI 
> approved licenses. Is this a correct assumption?
> -Martin W.

Do You Yahoo!?
Yahoo! GeoCities - quick and easy web site hosting, just $8.95/month.
license-discuss archive is at

More information about the License-discuss mailing list