why LGPL 2.0?

["Joseph J. Strout" <joe strout net>]

I'm currently trying to convince my company to base its next major 
project on GTK++.  But they're nervous about the licensing issues 
(this will be a commercial product).

Part of this is caused by the fact that GTK++ comes with LGPL version 
2, from June 1991.  This has some very confusing wording in section 
5, where the first paragraph says that a program that links with the 
library is not a derivative work, and the second paragraph says that 
a program that links with the library IS a derivative work.

I notice that the current version of LGPL at gnu.org is Version 2.1, 
from February 1999.  This has slightly clearer wording in section 5 
(though it still contains this apparent contradiction).  Any chance 
the copyright holders of the GTK++ code would consider updating to 
that version of the license?

Also, if our attorney needs a written statement of approval from 
someone clarifying that our intended use of GTK++ does not constitute 
a derivative work, whom would we talk to about that?

Thanks,
- Joe

--
,------------------------------------------------------------------.
|    Joseph J. Strout         Check out the Mac Web Directory:     |
|    joe strout net           http://www.macwebdir.com/            |
`------------------------------------------------------------------'