Is this clarification sufficient? If not, what more do we require?
No. What the FSF needs to say is that inclusion of the external interface names (methods, filenames, imports, etc.) defined by an LGPL jar file, so that a non-LGPL jar can make calls to the LGPL jar's implementation, does not cause the including work to be derived from the LGPL work even though java uses late-binding by name (requiring that names be copied into the derived executable), and thus does not (in and of itself) cause the package as a whole to be restricted to distribution as (L)GPL or as open source per section 6 of the LGPL.
A very clear statement on the issue. I was still missing the "...names be copied..." part to fully understand the difference between C and java to this regards.
I see why there are heavy legal issues.
I'll CC: Andy, who insisted a lot in the httpd case and is not subscribed here.
....Roy
--------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
