On Thu, 13 Sep 2001, Ben Bucksch wrote:
>
> Ian Hickson wrote:
>
>>On Thu, 13 Sep 2001, Ben Bucksch wrote:
>>
>>>Ian Hickson wrote:
>>>
>>>> Is there a need (real or perceived) for Mozilla code to be
>>>> distributable as an LGPL library?
>>>>
>>> Yes, for the same reason as to use it under GPL terms: In order to use
>>> it in LGPL projects.
>>>
>> Why do we care about LGPL projects and not, say, projects using the
>> original BSD license, the Apache license, the Zope license, the IBM
>> public license, the Qt public license, the Sun Industry Standards
>> Source License, etc, etc, etc?
>
> Are all of those accepted Open Source licenses? (esp. teh sun one.)
They come from the "GPL-Incompatible, Free Software Licenses" section of
the FSF license list:
http://www.fsf.org/licenses/license-list.html#GPLIncompatibleLicenses
> If so, are they incompatible with the MPL in the sense that you cannot
> make a project out of source with mixed licenses? Even if so, they are
> not used as widely as thee LGPL.
Wait, I thought the problem was that you couldn't TAKE Mozilla code and
place it INSIDE some LGPL'ed code. As I have already mentioned, the MPL
and the LGPL can, as I understand it, quite happily co-exist in an
executable. It's only in a single source file that the problem occurs.
I am confused as to what problem you have with the LGPL that you don't
have with the other licenses.
--
Ian Hickson )\ _. - ._.) fL
/. `- ' ( `--'
`- , ) - > ) \
irc.mozilla.org:Hixie _________________________ (.' \) (.' -' __________
