Am Sonntag, den 02.03.2008, 12:09 +0100 schrieb Nicolas Vervelle: > Egon Willighagen a écrit : > > On Sat, Mar 1, 2008 at 7:14 PM, Nicolas Vervelle > > <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > > > Should we move to the new version of the GNU LGPL (v3) instead of the > > > current one (v2.1) ? > > > > > > > What advantages do you see? > > > Apart from simply being up to date, I think the main advantage is that > the new LGPL is compatible with more other licenses (Apache license > for example). http://www.gnu.org/licenses/quick-guide-gplv3.html > That will let us use more external libraries if needed, and also will > clarify the situation with some libraries we are already using > (especially Jakarta Commons CLI which is under Apache license, > normally not compatible with LGPL v2.1)
"Normally"? Can you tell what makes it compatible in this case IYO? I mean, what prevents users or distributors from being affected by the license violation? commons-cli 1.1 is AFAIK licensed under the Apache 2.0 license, which is AFAIK compatible to the GPL except GPL 2.0. Regards, Daniel ------------------------------------------------------------------------- This SF.net email is sponsored by: Microsoft Defy all challenges. Microsoft(R) Visual Studio 2008. http://clk.atdmt.com/MRT/go/vse0120000070mrt/direct/01/ _______________________________________________ Jmol-developers mailing list [email protected] https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/jmol-developers
