License compatibility of MS-PL and MS-CL (Was: (RE: Groklaw's OSI item (was: When will CPAL actually be _used_?))

[Matthew Flaschen]

Donovan Hawkins wrote:
> Whether there is some clever way to legally keep pure MS-PL code
> distinct from pure BSDL code in a project that generates a single
> executable is perhaps a more complicated legal question (though linking
> is certainly valid).

However, in my view this solution is not acceptable for the GPL, which
requires the work as a whole to be GPL.  I agree with your analysis,
Donovan, but I would like the MS representatives to explicitly answer
our question about whether it is GPL-compatible (and compatible with
other source code licenses).

This is very important, because permissive licenses are generally
understood to be compatible with more restrictive source code licenses.
 If the answer is that MS-PL is not compatible in this way, I would
appreciate a name change.

Matt Flaschen