On Thu, 17 Jan 2013 14:12:29 -0200 Gustavo Sverzut Barbieri <barbi...@profusion.mobi> wrote:
> On Thu, Jan 17, 2013 at 1:36 AM, David Seikel <onef...@gmail.com> > wrote: > >> Well, the resulting license is different. Indeed it will be LGPL. > >> But say you take Evas and remove eina dep, you could use that as > >> BSD. <snip> > There is nothing related to virus other than FUD You said so yourself, the BSD licensed parts of EFL are now effectively LGPL licensed. That's not FUD, that's viral. > BSD says nothing other than you must retain its copyright when you > distribute its source code. It's fully a subset of LGPL, as so LGPL is > more restrictive, extending with more clauses. BSD does not say anything about restricting the right to copy in the way LGPL does. It's a copyright licence, as such, it reflects the desires of the copyright owner and is a legal document. A third party is not allowed to further restrict those copyrights, they simply do not have that right. It's legal rights, not code, we don't get to refactor things to our liking like that. lol -- A big old stinking pile of genius that no one wants coz there are too many silver coated monkeys in the world.
signature.asc
Description: PGP signature
------------------------------------------------------------------------------ Master Visual Studio, SharePoint, SQL, ASP.NET, C# 2012, HTML5, CSS, MVC, Windows 8 Apps, JavaScript and much more. Keep your skills current with LearnDevNow - 3,200 step-by-step video tutorials by Microsoft MVPs and experts. ON SALE this month only -- learn more at: http://p.sf.net/sfu/learnmore_122712
_______________________________________________ enlightenment-devel mailing list enlightenment-devel@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/enlightenment-devel
