Hello, as I understand the "classpath exception" stuff, it would rather apply to the GPL, not the LGPL.
IANAL, but I think the reason why Sun, for example, has chosen the GPL +classpath exception instead of the LGPL is that the LGPL is not very clear, stable, coherent, etc. from a legal point of view. It is also more restrictive than GPL+exception. GPL + exception has the same goals as LGPL, but is more robust, and a bit more permissive. I really don't know the result of adding the classpath exception to the LGPL licence... see http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/GPL_linking_exception Other than that, I would have no personal objection ! Franck Le lundi 07 avril 2008 à 22:31 +0200, Ceki Gulcu a écrit : > Hello, > > Subsequent to a request on the pax-logging mailing list [1], Niclas > Hedhman asked me whether we would add a "Classpath exception" to our > LGPL license. > > In principle, I have no objections to adding such an exception. As > such, I intend to add the following two paragraphs to logback's > license statement. > > > Classpath Exception > > According to the terms of LGPL, a "Combined Work" is a work produced > by combining or linking an Application with logback (the Library). In > section 4, the LGPL mandates that one may convey a Combined Work under > terms of one's choice that, taken together, effectively do not > restrict modification of the portions of the Library contained in the > Combined Work and reverse engineering for debugging such > modifications. > > > As a special exception, the copyright holders of logback give you > permission to link logback with independent modules to produce an > executable, regardless of the license terms of these independent > modules, and to copy and distribute the resulting executable under > terms of your choice, provided that you also meet, for each linked > independent module, the terms and conditions of the license of that > module. An independent module is a module which is not derived from or > based on logback. If you modify logback, you may extend this exception > to your version of logback, but you are not obliged to do so. If you > do not wish to do so, delete this exception statement from your > version. > > Any comments? > > > [1] http://thread.gmane.org/gmane.comp.java.ops4j.general/4636/focus=4637 > _______________________________________________ Logback-user mailing list [email protected] http://qos.ch/mailman/listinfo/logback-user
