On quinta-feira, 11 de agosto de 2016 19:50:35 PDT Alexander Nassian wrote: > > And they're LGPLv2. The v3 clauses cause lots of companies to run away. > > Really? v3 just clarifies some of the implications of v2 in a more suitable > way for lawyers. Many people that run away don't know how to get their > products safe with the requirement to let the user on the system. But it's > possible and no real reason against v3.
The "v3" is hardly "just clarifies" over the v2. It adds at least two extra provisions: * the patent grant * the "installation instructions" clause Regardless of whether the reasons why companies run away is valid or not, the fact is that they do. I submit Evidence A: Apple stopped updating GCC when it went GPLv3 in version 4.3 and instead started their own compiler. So it's unimportant whether the reasons are valid. It's important that we understand the consequences if we do choose to accept an LGPLv3 dependency. -- Thiago Macieira - thiago.macieira (AT) intel.com Software Architect - Intel Open Source Technology Center _______________________________________________ Development mailing list [email protected] http://lists.qt-project.org/mailman/listinfo/development
