Showing up disconnected in my news, this worried me a bit:
.Net Guy
Using EMACS doesn't cause the files you edit to become GPL'd. Sam is echoing an unfortunate misinterpretation that I've seen go around (on the DOTNET mailing list, probably) about the wording of the GPL license.Not exactly. Let me draw your attention to the troublesome wording... thelicenseclearly states that... source code ... may not be used with ... any software licensed under the terms of the GNU General Public License (GPL)
Besides that being even theoretically crazy paranoia on the part of the license author if it does say that, the linked license doesn't have the phrase may not be used with in it at all. Not sure if it's been changed or what.
