begin quoting Rick Funderburg as of Wed, Feb 15, 2006 at 12:17:56PM -0800: > > Well, if it is *L*GPL, IBM is not required to return changes. > > Hmm, the way I understood the LGPL is that any changes to the code would > have to be released. However, using or linking to the LGPL'd code in a > product would not "infect" your code with any particular license.
That's my interpretation as well. Changes _to_ the code have to be released under the LGPL, while mere _use_ of the code is unrestricted. And if you don't show your code to anyone (like google), you're not required to "return changes" for either GPL or LGPL, so far as I can tell. -- _ |\_ \| -- [email protected] http://www.kernel-panic.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/kplug-list
