[
Lists Home |
Date Index |
Thread Index
]
Elliotte Harold wrote:
> Aleksander Slominski wrote:
>
>
>> anyway i never could really follow why LGPL for C style-linking is OK
>> but LGPL for JARs is not so if you have a definitive FSF resource on
>> that i would like to know it.
>>
>
> You couldn't follow it because the position didn't make any sense.
> LGPL is just fine for Java.
do you mind to actually show some proof for it and not just make a
statement?
show me some facts.
i do not know anything that clarifies all this confusion:
http://developers.slashdot.org/developers/03/07/17/2257224.shtml
http://radio.weblogs.com/0122027/2003/07/18.html
http://weblogs.java.net/blog/rubys/archive/2003/07/lgpl_java_links.html
http://www.artima.com/forums/flat.jsp?forum=141&thread=7997
> Incompatibility between LGPL and Java is an urban legend.
so lot of people spent time discussing it for fun?
or maybe because it *is* confusing and needs clarifications ...
> Depending on whose talking, it's based on a misunderstanding of Java,
> a misunderstanding of the LGPL, or both.
it would help if FSF clearly stated position on this on their website
(if not in updated license L/GPL 3.0) so it can be used a definitive
resource and not just rumors like somebody said something (or heard
"Brad Kuhn's comments ..." )
i could not find link to the authoritative resource ... anybody had more
luck?
thanks,
alek
--
The best way to predict the future is to invent it - Alan Kay
|
