It's not about relationship of pygame to standard python library (between LGPL and Python licenses), but about obligations for games developed with pygame to pygame's sourcebase.
On Tue, Jul 8, 2008 at 1:57 AM, Chris <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Pygame isn't changing anything in the python codebase so there's no > obligations to the standard python library. Read the GPL. No consequences > for merely using python. > > > techtonik wrote: > >> Just a minor correction to avoid people be confused about Python itself. I >> wonder if pygame accepted Python license - how many games were released >> under it? I've reread LGPL once more and still unsure what consequences >> are >> if it can be applied to libraries that are linked as a source code like >> pygame and not inclide any header files. >> >> On Wed, Jul 2, 2008 at 10:48 PM, Chris <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: >> >> um... thanks but we're talking about licensing pygame projects, not the >>> python codebase. >>> >>> >>> techtonik wrote: >>> >>> On Mon, Jun 30, 2008 at 7:58 AM, James Paige <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> >>>> wrote: >>>> >>>> I notice LGPL is used on a lot of pygame projects. Is that because >>>> >>>>> pygame itself uses LGPL? It makes sense for pygame to use LGPL because >>>>>> it's a huge, widely used library but it's not apparent as to why the >>>>>> game projects themselves to use LGPL. >>>>>> >>>>>> Yes, the fact that pygame, and python are both LGPL is a main reason >>>>> why >>>>> many pygame games are LGPL. >>>>> >>>>> >>>> Python is not LGPL - read http://www.python.org/psf/license/ >>>> In general - it is BSD-like in the way that you may use source or >>>> binaries >>>> in any way you want and don't have to disclose your modifications, but >>>> you >>>> should preserve the copyrights. >>>> >>>> --anatoly t. >>>> >>>> >>> >> >> > -- --anatoly t.
