Re: What is the licensing term for Common C++

[David Sugar]

It is probably worth commenting on this a bit further.  The one problem I 
recall immediately with the LGPL as it applies to C++ class frameworks is the 
way it defines and refers to "linking" vs "derived works".  In concept, a C++ 
header with inline members or template is not "linked" in the same sense as 
one might presume the meaning in traditional C library, and what does one 
make of a class who's base class is defined in a header in a LGPL protected 
library?  Is creating a derived C++ class purely a linking operation or 
creating a derived/composite work?

At the time it seemed simpler to take the language of the GPL and provide an 
appropriate priviledges to allow Common C++ to be used in ways that achieve 
the same goals of the LGPL, but without using the sane choice of language for 
this that is found in the LGPL.  We actually looked at the Guile license, 
which also faced many of these questions, and choose to use their methodoligy 
for creating a special priviledge in this regard.  Of course, this was a 
number of years ago, and the language of the LGPL (and GPL) has evolved over 
time to better address the needs of object oriented frameworks.  If the 
language of the current LGPL were close enough to resolving these goals, I 
think we would likely switch to it, as that would resolve some confusion over 
the exact license status.  I have found it simpler to explain it as a 
LGPL-like license since we were trying for much the same effect within the 
context of a C++ framework, and most people basically understand what the 
LGPL is.

On Thursday 05 December 2002 15:15, Federico Montesino Pouzols wrote:
> Well, it is licensed under the GPL + a linking exception. See
> the files COPYING and COPYING.addendum, or the 'Distribution' chapter
> in the manual. I would suggest you not to look at sourceforge, but at
> Savannah (http://savannah.gnu.org/projects/commoncpp/), which is
> currently preferred for the development of cc++.
>
> On Thu, Nov 28, 2002 at 11:44:43AM -0800, Lokesh Johri wrote:
> > Hello,
> > Could you please tell me what is the licensing term for Common C++- is it
> > GPL or LGPL.
> > Source forge labels it as LGPL , Common C++ home page labels it as GPL.
> > The copyright notice with the package is GPL while the readme mentions it
> > as LGPL.
> >
> > Could you please clarify.
> > Thanks,
> > Lokesh
> > ________________________________________________________
> >
> > Lokesh Johri
> >
> > Software Engineering, Probe Systems, NP Test Inc.
> >
> > 150, Baytech Drive                 Work: (408) 586 6482
> >
> > San Jose CA 95132                Mobile: (408) 887-7338
> >
> >                                                   Fax: (408) 586-4662
> >
> >                                                   address@hidden
>
> _______________________________________________
> Bug-commoncpp mailing list
> address@hidden
> http://mail.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/bug-commoncpp