On 09/15/2015 01:45 AM, David Kastrup wrote:
> So having our binary interfaces and calling conventions and
> memory/exception handling default to "like Emacs does" is not just
> Lisp-friendly but is also keeping our license enforcement options more
> conservative. 

I don't see how. Once we have a module that allows general-purpose
loading of code not intended for use in Emacs (no matter how hard that
initial module is to write), there will be literally nothing preventing
users making arbitrary GPLv3-compatible modules that allow users to
chain-load non-GPLv3-compatible code. There's no way to require that
everything in the Emacs address space be licensed under the GPL. And
that's a good thing, because equating sharing an address space with a
"derivative work" boundary is ridiculous.

Even if Emacs were to look for some I_LOAD_ONLY_GPLV3=1 export from
loaded modules, the GPL does not prohibit a module simply lying. The
GPLv3 does not require the implementation of technical license
enforcement mechanisms. (If it did, it would violate freedom 0.)