[Date Prev][Date Next] [Thread Prev][Thread Next] [Date Index] [Thread Index]

Re: GPL and LGPL issues for LCC, or lack thereof

On re-reading the sequence of events, it looks like I was the one who
switched the context of the hypothetical "reproducible build tools"
obligation from GPL to LGPL.  Bruce, my apologies for implying that
you were the one who switched contexts.  So we seem to agree that the
support for this requirement isn't adequate in the GPL (which I
consider to be a flaw in the GPL).

I think the support is adequate in the LGPL, as my most recent e-mail
elaborates.  Presumably that's what is really at issue (at a strictly
legal level) in the LCC; proprietary applications don't usually link
against GPL libraries, since most ISVs consider the GPL likely to be
enforceable.  For code under other licenses, I have to fall back on
the DFSG to contend that Debian shouldn't encourage efforts to
standardize binaries.  I find arguments from the Social Contract and
hypothetical benefits to users unpersuasive.

- Michael

Reply to: