On Wed, Apr 04, 2007 at 06:58:30PM -0400, Karl Berry via RT wrote: > Hi Sylvain, > > > It is possible to use the LGPL instead? > > Since it is possible to use LGPL'd code with *proprietary* software, I > would certainly hope it can be used with the CPL, ASL, etc.
I'm not so sure, because the CPL is a copyleft. We couldn't combine GPL + LGPL if there weren't the explicit conversion clause in the LGPL. Both licenses need to accept the combination. Moreover the CPL authors seem to have a different interpretation of "derivative work" than ours (eg "Contributions do not include additions to the Program which: (i) are separate modules of software distributed in conjunction with the Program under their own license agreement, and (ii) are not derivative works of the Program." - which we would interpret as "void set", afaik). That doesn't help. > As long as > the code under each license is distinct, of course. (That is, that the > LGPL'd code doesn't actually derive from the CPL/ASL'd code. I doubt > this is the case.) > > Of course, Brett can say more authoritatively. > > License proliferation sucks. -- Sylvain
