Aslak Hellesoy wrote, On 02/04/2003 0.48:
I just got an answer from Mark.
So I guess it should be ok without further ado. Pleas let me know if it
ain't.
It seems just fine.
Cheers,
Aslak
-Original Message-
From: Mark Wutka [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: 2. april 2003 00:24
To: Aslak
Can you get Mark Wutka to state that his LGPL explicitly permits linking
and that section 6 of the LGPL does not apply to end users, etc etc? Is
he the copyright holder?
If so than you should be good to go (from my understanding). (As the
copyright holder he can explicitly address the issues
Is this reply FAQ/Wiki'd somewhere?
Seems to me to be a good set of questions to ask of an LGPL project to
cause happiness all around. Assuming it's okay with the powers that be,
boards/committees/usuals.
Hen
On Tue, 1 Apr 2003, Andrew C. Oliver wrote:
Can you get Mark Wutka to state that
Andrew C. Oliver wrote:
Can you get Mark Wutka to state that his LGPL explicitly permits linking
and that section 6 of the LGPL does not apply to end users, etc etc? Is
he the copyright holder?
If so than you should be good to go (from my understanding). (As the
copyright holder he can
On Tue, 1 Apr 2003, Sam Ruby wrote:
Andrew C. Oliver wrote:
Can you get Mark Wutka to state that his LGPL explicitly permits linking
and that section 6 of the LGPL does not apply to end users, etc etc? Is
he the copyright holder?
If so than you should be good to go (from my
I just got an answer from Mark.
So I guess it should be ok without further ado. Pleas let me know if it
ain't.
Cheers,
Aslak
-Original Message-
From: Mark Wutka [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: 2. april 2003 00:24
To: Aslak Hellesoy
Cc: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Re: [EMAIL
Sam Ruby wrote:
Andrew C. Oliver wrote:
Can you get Mark Wutka to state that his LGPL explicitly permits
linking and that section 6 of the LGPL does not apply to end users,
etc etc? Is he the copyright holder?
If so than you should be good to go (from my understanding). (As the
copyright
