On 05/09/2011, at 3:25 AM, Clint Whaley wrote:
>
> So, if someone sees something wrong with LGPL, I would like them to
> discuss it so that I can understand the problem. If there are other
> licenses or if there are ramifications I am missing, I would like
> to get all sides before making a final decision.
The problem I would have with LGPL is that if I build an interface to LGPL
software it is a derived work and must be open source. I don't care about
that myself but it means my software *using* that interface is less appealing
to my target audience which is everyone *including closed source commercial
developers*. I want my software to be FFAU (free for any use). To maintain
that status I cannot permit any software included (in the core) to be
tainted with (L)GPL like licences.
In fact my core product uses Ocaml, and Ocaml uses libraries with
LGPL "with linking exception" licence: a special exception is made
to allow static linkage of library code without impediment.
--
john skaller
skaller@...
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Special Offer -- Download ArcSight Logger for FREE!
Finally, a world-class log management solution at an even better
price-free! And you'll get a free "Love Thy Logs" t-shirt when you
download Logger. Secure your free ArcSight Logger TODAY!
http://p.sf.net/sfu/arcsisghtdev2dev_______________________________________________
Math-atlas-devel mailing list
Math-atlas-devel@...
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/math-atlas-devel
