"Richard W.E. Furse" wrote:
>
> Against all expectation I've managed to find time to do a LGPL release of
> LADSPA.
>
> I'm not entirely happy about this scenario - see
> http://www.ladspa.org/cmt/license.html and
> http://www.ladspa.org/ladspa_sdk/license.html for some issues. However this
> approach puts at least some license on LADSPA so that it can be released in
> Linux distributions - it will need tweaking to make it less restrictive so
> that it can be used with closed-source hosts and plugins. Any lawyers out
> there?
>
> Apologies to everyone for the delay, and thanks to Kai who suggested
> more-or-less this approach to me weeks ago...
>
> --Richard
thanks for settling this at last.
it would have been catastrophic if debian cannot ship LADSPA.
as far as i understand the lgpl, it does exactly what you want:
closed source programs may link it and implement it without becoming
subject to the lgpl themselves.
perhaps you could state more clearly what problems you see, and then
we could ask the gnu folks for an expert opinion (i'm assuming that
rms does have a profound understanding of all the lgpl's
implications).
--
J�rn Nettingsmeier
home://Kurf�rstenstr.49.45138.Essen.Germany
phone://+49.201.491621
http://icem-www.folkwang-hochschule.de/~nettings/
http://www.linuxdj.com/audio/lad/
