On 17 April 2010 14:56, Xilman <[email protected]> wrote: > > > On Apr 16, 9:23 am, Bill Hart <[email protected]> wrote: >> What you suggest is to effectively maintain two versions of MPIR, one >> version 2.1 the other 3. We did consider such an option, but it is >> much harder than it seems, and we simply don't have sufficiently many > > It is much, much harder than it seems for legal reasons. Having been > directly exposed to Microsoft's legal team, I'm aware of some of the > difficulties which may not have been considered previously. > > The main problem is contamination. Even a suspicion of contamination > can cause real worries.
There was a very nice trick I found for saving memory in one of the LGPL v3+ files that I wanted to use in one of my LGPL v2+ files. It's really hard to know precisely where to draw the line. I mean, it is surely a completely standard trick, and not violating anyone's copyright to use it. In the end, I decided not to use it. But that situation is also clearly completely silly. The whole purpose of Open Source is so that such things won't happen, and yet they do. > > It is difficult enough to keep two clearly distinct software projects > separate enough that those who wish to cause trouble will find it hard > to do so. Attempting to keep LGPL2 and LGPL3 code distinct, and > obviously so, is likely to prove a nightmare. > > > Paul > > -- > You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups > "mpir-devel" group. > To post to this group, send email to [email protected]. > To unsubscribe from this group, send email to > [email protected]. > For more options, visit this group at > http://groups.google.com/group/mpir-devel?hl=en. > > -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "mpir-devel" group. To post to this group, send email to [email protected]. To unsubscribe from this group, send email to [email protected]. For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/mpir-devel?hl=en.
