Hi Roland, On Wed, Jan 18, 2006 at 01:55:22PM +0100, "Roland Häder" wrote: > I have looked up the already started source code. I have used code from my > GNU GPL (not LGPL!) project so I have no other chance left: GNU GPL.
if you are the copyright holder of "your" other project,
you can always release this under GNU LGPL, too.
To choose between LGPL and GPL is not just from your believes,
but also from practical tactical considerations.
It does not depend on a "libary" or so,
as the L stands for "lesser", as in "lesser protection".
I cannot give you all the rules, because this would need a longer
in-depth discussion. However some hints:
Using more protection (GNU GPL) will lower the chance of
wide distribution. This is good if you have an outstanding product
without much proprietary competition
and you do not need many technical connections which could case problems.
Using less protection will raise the chance of distribution.
This can make sense if you want to make sure you get a critical mass,
e.g. in light of the proprietary competition.
In some circumstances, even a license without protection,
like the X11 style license can be the best choice for the overall
effect of freedom. Example: ogg vorbis, where even Richard found a
non-protecting license adaquate.
Bernhard
pgpIxxaxXG0nm.pgp
Description: PGP signature
_______________________________________________ Discussion mailing list [email protected] https://mail.fsfeurope.org/mailman/listinfo/discussion
