At 6:51 PM +0200 on 7/10/99, M. Uli Kusterer wrote:
>>I am in favor of building an OpenTalk interpreter like an
>>embedded Metacard product and putting it under the
>>LGPL.
>>(...)
>
>Well, I don't claim I grok the law stuff, but if the other's think this'll
>work, I'm with you.
>
>I've re-read Anthony's summary and have a few questions:
>
>1) Can binaries be distributed under the LGPL w/o including the sources
>(with sources being available upon request)?
If you give the three-year agreement to give a copy of them at cost, which
is a pain in the a**.
>2) What about this clause that we have to allow re-linking of our code and
>library code; can I have the object file of our code in above "upon
>request" shipment?
I don't think so. Unless it is a shared library, of course (but that rules
out any system with bad shared library support).
