Murray Cumming wrote: > No, we are very explicit on the website: > http://www.gtkmm.org/license.shtml > and we are very clear about it when asked on mailing lists. We are the > copyright holders. Legally, it's our opinion that counts. If we changed > our minds later, and decided to sue you, we wouldn't have a legal leg to > stand on. > > This is about only the arbitrary, vague, and probably unenforcable "10 > lines or less" mention in the LGPL in this paragraph, which we failed to > notice years ago:
Thanks for this. > This is at first an issue for libsigc++. This is the last thread about > this: > http://mail.gnome.org/archives/libsigc-list/2006-July/msg00033.html ..and this. > I still do intend to actually add such an exception to our LGPL license. > I just haven't got around to it yet. I plan to do it soon. I don't > consider it urgent because I think we are very clear. Interestingly, if I understand it correctly (and I may well not) the draft v3 LGPL in Sections 3 and 4 may be permissive enough. http://gplv3.fsf.org/lgpl-draft-2006-07-27.html The 10 line limit is still there in the new Section 3 but exceeding it just requires the LGPL licensee to: """ a. Give prominent notice with each copy of the object code that the Library is used in it and that the Library and its use are covered by this License. b. Accompany the object code with a copy of the GNU GPL and this License. """ Section 4 has similar notice requirements and allows for shared linking in a "Combined Work". Neil. _______________________________________________ gtkmm-list mailing list [email protected] http://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/gtkmm-list
