Tom Tromey wrote:
> >>>>> "Patrick" == Patrick Spingys <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>
> >> The new Classpath license is GPL+exception which essentially makes it a
> >> weaker LGPL. You do not have to provide binary objects for relinking.
>
> Patrick> And is it possible to integrate it in commercial programs?
>
> Yes. The GPL+exception is a variant of the license used for libgcc,
> which everybody agrees is ok for commercial programs, embedded
> programs, etc.
You mean, that the license existion longer?
But what is if anybody want to port the libraries to an other programming-language?
The new license is decided for Java-libraries. And Java-libraries are external.
Is it possible that propritary programs can use it, if it's ported to an other
programming-language?
GNOME/GTK+-libraries are licensed under the LGPL, so there existing a lot of
propritary programs, which used this. Is the same possible with the
Classpath-classes, if its existing for other programming-languages?
And it is possible, that its ported to the differents.
The toolkit of Tcl/Tk was ported to Perl, too, so that existing Perl/Tk.
I don't know, if it's the best way to put Classpath under an other license, then
the LGPL.
And if it's possible, that commercial programs can integrate your classes in
commercial programs:
Why existing then the LGPL? Where is the LGPL better?
I think, that we only two GNU-licences need.
Patrick
