Re: (L)GPLv3

>From Christian Fredrik Kalager Schaller on Friday, 09 July, 2010:
>On Fri, 2010-07-09 at 16:53 +0200, Maciej Piechotka wrote:
>> On 09/07/10 16:37, Christian Fredrik Kalager Schaller wrote:
>> > I would strongly prefer glib to not change its license, we are keeping
>> > the lgplv2.1 in GStreamer, partly because a lot of people making
>> > products with GStreamer prefer it over lgplv3. If glib switched under us
>> > it would make our license stability a bit of a joke. If someone wants to
>> > use glib under the lgpl3 they can do so now with the current license, if
>> > upstream changes however, people can not keep using it under the
>> > lgplv2.1 without forking.
>> Not quite true. You can link LGPL 2.1 project with LGPL 3.0 library
>> according to FSF.
>> IANAL but LGPL is not viral license and you can link anything with it.
>That is true, however it still adds LGPLv3 to the licensing stack people
>have to relate to and deal with. So while the license isn't viral it
>still means people have to use a LGPLv3 licensed library in order to use

What specifically are their objections, particularly since the LGPLv3
  doesn't have the linking stuff that is generally at the root of
  common objections?


Joseph Pingenot====================================joseph pingenot org

[Date Prev][Date Next]   [Thread Prev][Thread Next]   [Thread Index] [Date Index] [Author Index]