Gervase Markham wrote: >> I personally don't see any reason one could not combine code under the >> GPL with code under the LGPL, leaving all license notices intact, and >> then distribute the resulting work as a whole under GPL terms. To >> claim otherwise would seem to imply that doing this violates the terms >> of either the LGPL or GPL; on what grounds would this be true? > > > Section 3 of the LGPL? > > <quote src="http://www.gnu.org/licenses/lgpl.html";> > 3. You may opt to apply the terms of the ordinary GNU General Public > License instead of this License to a given copy of the Library. To do > this, you must alter all the notices that refer to this License, ...
I know what Section 3 says. My point is, is it _required_ as a condition of the GPL or LGPL that when code under the LGPL is combined with code under the GPL to create a work to be shipped under GPL terms, that the LGPL license notices must first be changed to GPL license notices? For example, consider the case when you take the source code for a GPLed application and the source code for an LGPLed library used by the application. You compile all the code, link it together (let's say statically for the sake of argument), and distribute the resulting work under GPL terms (as required by the GPL). Are you (or Hixie for that matter) claiming that the GPL (or LGPL) requires that in order to do this one must (not may, _must_) physically change all the LGPL license notices in the library source files to GPL license notices first? Frank -- Frank Hecker [EMAIL PROTECTED]
