Re: (L)GPLv3

[Joseph Pingenot <joseph pingenot org>]

>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
>GStreamer.

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

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