Alan Robertson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Matthew Soffen wrote: >> I don't see it being any problem. >> Is there any "convention" that other projects use ? > > > Not that I know of. I just thought this might make things clearer to > those who want to link to our libraries - which ones are under which > license. > > For those who are linking to our GPLed libraries, this would make them > change their library names. I doubt that there are that many people who > do that. And, if they're doing it unknowingly, it would certainly raise > their level of awareness. > > It would be very hard to make that mistake by accident in future releases.
I think its a sound idea to make the distintion as clear as possible. Though your solution makes the library names a bit more wordy than they were before, I think it is worthwhile as it does make the distinction just that little bit clearer. Actually, quite a lot clearer. -- Horms H: http://www.vergenet.net/~horms/ W: http://www.valinux.co.jp/en/ _______________________________________________________ Linux-HA-Dev: [email protected] http://lists.linux-ha.org/mailman/listinfo/linux-ha-dev Home Page: http://linux-ha.org/
