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

Re: Artistic and LGPL compatibility in jar files

In message <[🔎] 20091214220044.1cc797d6.frx@firenze.linux.it>, Francesco Poli <frx@firenze.linux.it> writes
On Mon, 14 Dec 2009 19:36:58 +0000 Anthony W. Youngman wrote:

That's why, actually, given the choice of LGPL 2.1 or 3, much as I
haven't investigated 3 very much, I'll almost certainly prefer 3 to 2.1
because it means other people CAN'T relicence my code :-)

Please note that adopting the LGPLv3 makes the work not linkable with
GPLv2 (only) works.

If you choose the LGPL in order to obtain a weak copyleft that allows
linking with proprietary code, forbidding linking with GPLv2 code looks
a bit awkward...

I'd add an exception to LGPL 3 :-)

Actually, I'd probably choose pure "GPL 2 or 3" :-)

Anthony W. Youngman - anthony@thewolery.demon.co.uk

Reply to: