First of all, I realize that answer to the question below is located in LGPL text. But: English is not my natural language, and I have never read LGPL before. So I would like to ask this directly.
The questions is: I intend to use CppUnit to create and run test suits for my PROPRIETARY software. I will NOT publish the software. Am I allowed to use CppUnit?
Thanx,
Victor
If you would like to refer to this comment somewhere else in this project, copy and paste the following link:
If you are writing software that will not be distributed in any form, you are free to use LGPL or GPL licensed code.
If you use GPL-licensed code to develop software that is given to other people, you must be willing to give those other people the source code to your entire software package. On the other hand, if you use only LGPL-licensed code in your project, then you only need to be willing to give the users of your program the bits of code that are covered by that license (including any modifications that you have made to it).
Again, though, if you don't distribute the software in any way, you're free to do what you want.
If you would like to refer to this comment somewhere else in this project, copy and paste the following link:
Let me also ask about meaning of term distribution. I intend to create test suits based on CppUnit for INTERNAL use in my company. There will be several instances of such testing suits on different computers. Is it distribution or no?
Thanx,
Victor
If you would like to refer to this comment somewhere else in this project, copy and paste the following link:
Read more carefully. Close reading of the GPL text seems to indicate that you are granted several rights in exchange for publishing your source code. One of those rights is the right to LINK to GPL code. i.e. You are not allowed to *link* to GPL code if you don't publish your sources, even if you don't publish the result.
Strange but true. GPL really is a badly written license.
Strictly read, LGPL can be linked with proprietary source code (although you may be required to distribute .obj files or .lib files for your proprietary code if you statically link to LGPL code). I haven't read LGPL closely enough to venture an opinion on what rights you are granted when, and in exchange for what.
My personal take: I'd use LGPL code for internal testing, but I would *NOT* use GPL code for internal testing.
My reading of the license text is that you must not link to GPL code.
If you would like to refer to this comment somewhere else in this project, copy and paste the following link:
If it's any consolation, it's not your English that it's at fault. It's the language of the GPL and LGPL. There are entire books written about the mysteries and vagaries of what the GPL and LGPL actually mean.
If you would like to refer to this comment somewhere else in this project, copy and paste the following link:
Hi All,
First of all, I realize that answer to the question below is located in LGPL text. But: English is not my natural language, and I have never read LGPL before. So I would like to ask this directly.
The questions is: I intend to use CppUnit to create and run test suits for my PROPRIETARY software. I will NOT publish the software. Am I allowed to use CppUnit?
Thanx,
Victor
If you are writing software that will not be distributed in any form, you are free to use LGPL or GPL licensed code.
If you use GPL-licensed code to develop software that is given to other people, you must be willing to give those other people the source code to your entire software package. On the other hand, if you use only LGPL-licensed code in your project, then you only need to be willing to give the users of your program the bits of code that are covered by that license (including any modifications that you have made to it).
Again, though, if you don't distribute the software in any way, you're free to do what you want.
Thank you for the explanation.
Let me also ask about meaning of term distribution. I intend to create test suits based on CppUnit for INTERNAL use in my company. There will be several instances of such testing suits on different computers. Is it distribution or no?
Thanx,
Victor
Read more carefully. Close reading of the GPL text seems to indicate that you are granted several rights in exchange for publishing your source code. One of those rights is the right to LINK to GPL code. i.e. You are not allowed to *link* to GPL code if you don't publish your sources, even if you don't publish the result.
Strange but true. GPL really is a badly written license.
Strictly read, LGPL can be linked with proprietary source code (although you may be required to distribute .obj files or .lib files for your proprietary code if you statically link to LGPL code). I haven't read LGPL closely enough to venture an opinion on what rights you are granted when, and in exchange for what.
My personal take: I'd use LGPL code for internal testing, but I would *NOT* use GPL code for internal testing.
My reading of the license text is that you must not link to GPL code.
If it's any consolation, it's not your English that it's at fault. It's the language of the GPL and LGPL. There are entire books written about the mysteries and vagaries of what the GPL and LGPL actually mean.