On Sat, Dec 22, 2001 at 02:16:05PM +1100, Jeff Turner wrote:
> As for LGPL, it's technical shortcomings are indeed problematic,
> specifically:
>
> "The scope of the LGPL is too coarse-grained. The scope is furthermore
> open to interpretation. It is limited to some fuzzy notion of
> functional entities ("a collection of software functions and/or data
> prepared so as to be conveniently linked with application programs")."
>
> I gather it's this "open to interpretation" problem which currently
> means LGPL'ed code cannot be used in Apache projects.
A few years ago, I was surprised when I went back to gnu.org to re-read
the LGPL -- and I noticed the name had been changed from the "Library
GPL" to the "Lesser GPL" ... after reading it, that seems a fair
description. I've seen some long discussions of the LGPL amoung the ASF
members interested in licenses -- iirc, the problems include
difficulties with maintenence releases and the fact that the LGPL is
ultimately still viral (it's just less virulent).
I don't know if there's a publicly posted explanation of this, but I
could ask around (there was some talk of this, a while back, but
ultimately istr it was left to lie for political reasons -- most of the
ASF folks are not really interested in getting into arguments over
licenses, just in writing software).
take care --
Ed
--
To unsubscribe, e-mail: <mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
For additional commands, e-mail: <mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
