nanogui@linuxhacker.org

> > some code was GPL'd ( engine\devarc.c for instance).  Now, I'm pretty sure
> > you can't statically link GPL'd code with proprietary without that
> > proprietary code falling under the GPL.  Is that correct? If so, it would
> Yes, it's correct. devarc.c has to reimplemented or relicensed by the author.

This is correct

> > seem there is a licensing problem with using Microwindows in a closed
> > application.  Also, wouldn't that mean that the entire Microwindows project
> > would have to be placed under the GPL?
> 
> That I don't know. Is MPL compatible with GPL?

Not clear, probably not.

The intention was always that the entire core system would be both MPL and GPL
licensed (you pick which suits you)

If there is GPL only stuff (eg drivers) that isnt core it might be worth 
following the BSD example and clearly seperating it in the file structure