Nathanael Nerode <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > I'm thinking of licensing a program under the GPL, but I dislike the > FSF's overly restrictive concept that 'dynamic linking is modification'. > > I want my program (and any derivative works) to be allowed to use > *accurately documented and published* interfaces to proprietary > (or any other) libraries or programs. Dynamic linking should be allowed > in this situation, as should RPC, pipes, etc. etc. (The interface > should allow for free implementations of it, although they don't need > to actually exist at the time. Its documentation doesn't need to be > written by anyone in particular; it could have been reverse-engineered, > even.) > > I *don't* want to allow a derivative of my program to be linked with a > proprietary program through secret, undocumented, or unpublished > interfaces.
If it is in your program, and you can get the sources for the program, then, by definition, it isn't secret anymore. > Is there a good licence to put on my program which will clearly allow > exactly this? Can it be done with GPL-plus-exceptions? > > This is the line I would draw regarding RPC vs. linking, etc. It also > renders the OS exception unnecessary. I suspect other people may agree > with me on this line, so it might be a generally useful piece of > information. I think the closest to what you want is the LGPL. Is there something in particular that you don't like about the LGPL? Regards, Walter Landry [EMAIL PROTECTED]
