On Fri, Mar 14, 2014 at 09:14:39PM +0100, Nico Schlömer wrote: > What about interoperability of Apache2 with LGPL2.1? Here's a GPL-centric image to show off license interop with common licenses: http://4.bp.blogspot.com/_-REQ3wEST4I/TEc2k263n-I/AAAAAAAAAfo/lpwAI5Twml8/s1600/quick-guide-gplv3-compatibility.png Also keep in mind GPLv3+ and LGPLv2.1 (hard) are not compatable. Which is to say; it's likely not OK to combine apache2 and LGPLv2, unless the apache2 and LGPL'd work are being linked, rather then incorperated into the same binary, in which case it may be fine. I'd have to re-read the LGPL exception text. > I was also a little worried about the "public domain" disclaimer. > After all, "public domain is not a license and the copyright holder > may choose to retract the software from PD at any moment" Wat. That's not a public domain dedication if they reserve any rights at all. Indeed, this would fail a DFSG check, if they're actually asserting the right to relicense something retroactively. Someone needs to give this guy a wiki page on what public domain means? > The "Bison exception" struck me as weird as well; I'd never come > across anything like it. The GPL has a neat clause wherein it allows you to disregard further restrictions, so exceptions can only serve to relax any rules that the GPL has -- which are *very* hard to use to create a nonfree work. > --Nico Cheers, Paul -- .''`. Paul Tagliamonte <paultag@debian.org> | Proud Debian Developer : :' : 4096R / 8F04 9AD8 2C92 066C 7352 D28A 7B58 5B30 807C 2A87 `. `'` http://people.debian.org/~paultag `- http://people.debian.org/~paultag/conduct-statement.txt
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: Digital signature