Distributing Python, slimer?

[Ken Seehof]

> On 2002-01-10 at 17:57:48, Ken Seehof warbled:
> > Just curious: Why would that be illegal?  My understanding is that the
> > Python
> > license permits arbitrary resale of the whole ball of wax, without
> > restriction.
>
> OK, I was exaggerating, but the point is that I haven't actually checked
> the licenses for Python, TCL, Tk and related support libraries to make
> sure that it is OK to re-sell them on a commercial scale. This method of
> distribution is fragile and undesirable for other reasons, but I can see
> the legal eagles kicking up a fuss before we even get to that.

Don't worry, you can:
http://tcl.activestate.com/software/tcltk/license_terms.html
http://www.python.org/doc/Copyright.html
http://www.python.org/2.2/license.html

Anyway, if you couldn't, Freeze wouldn't help much since it just makes
a binary concatenation of all the relevant libraries (along with lots of
brilliant glue code).  So Freeze would really not have much effect on
licensing issues if there were any, which there really aren't.

"""(1) GPL-compatible doesn't mean that we're distributing Python under
    the GPL.  All Python licenses, unlike the GPL, let you distribute
    a modified version without making your changes open source.  The
    GPL-compatible licenses make it possible to combine Python with
    other software that is released under the GPL; the others don't."""

"""The gist of it is that Python is absolutely free, even for commercial use
(including resale). There is no GNU-like "copyleft" restriction. """

Nevertheless, I agree it is much preferable to use the McMillan stuff
for reliability and convenience reasons.

- Ken