Re: GPL or LGPL ?

[Rodrigo Moya <rodrigo linuxave net>]

"Sergio A. Kessler" wrote:
> 
> Rodrigo Moya <rodrigo@linuxave.net> el día Thu, 13 Jul 2000 15:13:12 +0200,
> escribió:
> 
> >> maybe:
> >> gnome-db         (containing the libraries) under LGPL
> >> gnome-db-tools   (containing the binaries) under GPL
> >>
> >> sure, a lot of work ...
> >>
> >not too much! In fact, this is what we decided last week so that the
> >guys in the GNU Enterprise project could use gnome-db libraries without
> >depending on GNOME. We'll make for the next release two more packages:
> >
> >* libgda
> >* libgda-devel
> 
> yup, I saw this on the ml archives...
> 
> but, can you put a little more descriptive name ?
> I'm sure you know very well what GDA means, but other people will
> have a hard time figuring what the hell is ...  :)
> (and it will alleviate the namespace pollution, gda can means very
> differents things)
> 
What name? the library is called GNOME Data Access (which could be
changed to GNU Data Access), and I don't find a better way to call it!!!
There are some RPMs and debian packages which have names more cryptic
than that.

Well, the packages could be called libgnomedataaccess, but isn't it too
long?

> >but this will only include the basic libraries, so we could also add
> >another package (gnome-db-core or gnome-db-libs) which include the other
> >libraries (client UI and bonobo).
> 
> IMO gnome-db is good enough, but it's up to you...
> 
well, this was for separating the GPL from the LGPL components as you
suggested.