[Top][All Lists]
[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: [Bug-gnulib] module maintainers
From: |
Paul Eggert |
Subject: |
Re: [Bug-gnulib] module maintainers |
Date: |
23 Jan 2003 16:37:57 -0800 |
address@hidden (Karl Berry) writes:
> Perhaps what we should do is keep the files that are mastered in gnulib
> under lgpl. And then keep a copy of all them under the gpl
> (automatically updated of course). Then gnulib users can pick whichever
> one they need.
That sounds reasonable. We could have the lgpl copies under lib-lgpl,
for example. I'd rather have the lib copies all be gpl'ed, though,
for convenience.
Bruno Haible writes:
> AFAIK there is no problem if you link an LGPL'ed .c file with one or
> more GPL'ed ones, is there?
It doesn't suffice simply to plop an LGPLed module directly into a
GPLed application. The module's copyright notice says something like
"you should have a copy of the LGPL" and the app won't have a copy.
It's confusing, as it requires readers of the app source code to have
specialized legal knowledge. Our longstanding tradition is to avoid
that sort of confusion using only the GPL for GPLed applications.
- Re: [Bug-gnulib] module maintainers, (continued)
Re: [Bug-gnulib] module maintainers, Karl Berry, 2003/01/23
- Re: [Bug-gnulib] module maintainers,
Paul Eggert <=
Re: [Bug-gnulib] module maintainers, Karl Berry, 2003/01/24
Re: [Bug-gnulib] module maintainers, Karl Berry, 2003/01/24