2012/4/7 Brian Mastenbrook <br...@mastenbrook.net> > You could instead distribute .zo files, but this falls into a well-known > grey area in the interpretation of the LGPL, so you may or may not be in > the clear. >
It seems quite unfortunate that this is apparently a grey area, since this is exactly what I would expect what somebody who wants to create closed-source software with Racket would like to do (i.e. distribute the .zo files for his own code, distribute compiled Racket + Racket source code to satisfy LGPL). Would it perhaps be possible that the Racket copyright holders would add a section to their license either explicitly condoning or forbidding this distribution model? Since the ambiguity seems to serve nobody. Stephan
____________________ Racket Users list: http://lists.racket-lang.org/users
