Re: [Hamlib-developer] Licensing

[<si...@al...>]

Hi Stephane,

Yes, no problem with LGPL on the ft817 backend.. this is the only one I
did... not sure about the others :)

best,
-Chris
----- Original Message -----
> Message: 1
> Date: Sun, 17 Nov 2002 17:11:11 +0100
> From: Stephane Fillod <f8...@fr...>
> To: Hamlib developers <ham...@li...>
> Subject: Re: [Hamlib-developer] Licensing
>
> On Wed, Nov 13, 2002, Nate Bargmann wrote:
> > If I recall, Frank had agreed to the LGPL change and these files were
> > likely just an oversight.  I want to be sure until I change my files.
> > Perhaps we should carefully go through the remaining files and be sure
> > they are all LGPL before the 1.1.4 release.
>
> (fillods@charybde:hamlib)$ grep '"GPL"' */*.c
> gnuradio/gr.c:  .copyright =     "GPL",
> yaesu/ft100.c:  .copyright =            "GPL",
> yaesu/ft817.c:  .copyright =            "GPL",
> yaesu/ft920.c:  .copyright =          "GPL",
>
> - gnuradio is GPL, on library constraint.
> - IIRC, ft100 and ft817 were written by Chris AA1VL, cloning Frank's work
> before the licensing change.  I hope he'll be okay to relicense
> accordingly.
> - ft920: Nate, you decide :)
>
> > Some GPL and som LGPL code could cause projects such as Debian
> > heartburn.
>
> It should be fine, since the frontend library is LGPL, and backends
> are plugins, i.e. the end user is reponsible to load them or not,
> according to their license.
> Maybe it should also be possible to compile selectively backends.
>
>
> 73
> Stephane
>
>
>
> --__--__--
>
> _______________________________________________
> Hamlib-developer mailing list
> Ham...@li...
> https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/hamlib-developer
>
>
> End of Hamlib-developer Digest