Re: illegal to link against python 2.x?
On Tue, Oct 16, 2001 at 02:17:20PM +0200, Timo Blazko Boewing wrote:
> a new version is just a number change or complete code rewrite? As far
> as I know, if you release something under the terms of the GPL, just
> that piece is "forever".
Yes and no. The GPLed release is out there for good and it can't be
un-GPLed after being released. However, the copyright holder (i.e.,
the original author(s)) can release the same code under a non-GPL
license and then refuse to do any further work on the GPLed version.
This is basically the same as Aladdin's policy of keeping the most
current version of ghostscript under a non-Free license and releasing
older versions under GPL, aside from the minor detail of which
version gets released first.
> Is the LGPL the right thing for that?
The LGPL is intended for libraries (which is what the first L
originally stood for, although I guess RMS wants it to be "Lesser"
now) that are so important to have standardized that you're willing
to let them be used by non-Free applications. It allows the LGPLed
code to be linked to other code without imposing any licensing
requirements on that other code.
(IANAL. TINLA. YLMV.)
--
When we reduce our own liberties to stop terrorism, the terrorists
have already won. - reverius
Innocence is no protection when governments go bad. - Mr. Slippery
Reply to: