On Mon, 31 Jan 2011 20:24:28 +0100 Juan Jose Garcia-Ripoll <juanjose.garciarip...@googlemail.com> wrote:
> The discussion is about GPL and then the author jumps off the wagon and says > it applies also to LGPL "because it is basically the same". This is not > true. LGPL does not force anyone to provide the sources of the files they > link against the library. GPL does. I also wouldn't have considered ECL for any serious project if it was under the GPL; Although I tend to prefer working with MIT/BSD style licensed code (I also release my own code under BSD-style licenses), the LGPL is fortunately sane enough, indeed. Toolchains under the GPL are problematic and need additional exception clauses, like GCC provides for GCC library code, autoconf for the configure script it produces, etc. As for the ECL dependencies, fortunately libgmp is also under the LGPL, boehm-gc and libffi under MIT/BSD-style licenses. For those using a GNU OS, glibc is also LGPL licensed. So I agree that there should be no problem other than perhaps due to the ignorance of some distribution services. -- Matt ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ Special Offer-- Download ArcSight Logger for FREE (a $49 USD value)! Finally, a world-class log management solution at an even better price-free! Download using promo code Free_Logger_4_Dev2Dev. Offer expires February 28th, so secure your free ArcSight Logger TODAY! http://p.sf.net/sfu/arcsight-sfd2d _______________________________________________ Ecls-list mailing list Ecls-list@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/ecls-list
