LGPL is the best approximation. The most exact answer is that it is licensed
under the terms of the GPL but with much the same additional privileges as found in the Guile License, and with much the same effect as the LGPL, as is the case
of Guile.
If you would like to refer to this comment somewhere else in this project, copy and paste the following link:
Wouldn't it be better to just say that rather than claim GPL/LGPL? *Exactly* what license is it? Is it *exactly* the same as the Guile license? If so, how about including it in the distribution, instead of making people download over a MB of code for a small text file (which I just did, and found out that Guile is actually plain GPL)? FWIW, I think that an LGPL license will promote use of the library while keeping it open, but a GPL license will encourage people to find other, probably less portable, solutions (at least when using a license that is incompatible with the GPL).
If you would like to refer to this comment somewhere else in this project, copy and paste the following link:
at the present moment, I'm working on a project which is probably
going to be commercial. And I'd like to use the CommonC++ Library for that project. In this case I'd appreciate this library being LGPL :-)
So the question is, can I link this library to my project or not?
Cheers, Alex
If you would like to refer to this comment somewhere else in this project, copy and paste the following link:
On this website it says the libs are released under LGPL but in the COPYING-file it is GPL. Which is the correct license for this package?
LGPL is the best approximation. The most exact answer is that it is licensed
under the terms of the GPL but with much the same additional privileges as found in the Guile License, and with much the same effect as the LGPL, as is the case
of Guile.
Wouldn't it be better to just say that rather than claim GPL/LGPL? *Exactly* what license is it? Is it *exactly* the same as the Guile license? If so, how about including it in the distribution, instead of making people download over a MB of code for a small text file (which I just did, and found out that Guile is actually plain GPL)? FWIW, I think that an LGPL license will promote use of the library while keeping it open, but a GPL license will encourage people to find other, probably less portable, solutions (at least when using a license that is incompatible with the GPL).
I agree that the difference between LGPL and GPL is huge.
In the real world programmers can't guarantee that everything we want to bring into a project will GPL.
Hopefully you can release everything under the LGPL in future to save people from having to research a 'nearly' LGPL license.
Hi,
at the present moment, I'm working on a project which is probably
going to be commercial. And I'd like to use the CommonC++ Library for that project. In this case I'd appreciate this library being LGPL :-)
So the question is, can I link this library to my project or not?
Cheers, Alex