Re: libapt-pkg for commercial use
On Wed, Apr 11, 2012 at 11:20, Goswin von Brederlow <firstname.lastname@example.org> wrote:
> Why isn't libapt LGPL?
Why not GPL? We do not really gain anything by making it LGPL and
the FSF actively advocates to not use the LGPL if you can .
And even if LGPL (or anything else) would be a great:
You are at least fourteen years to late for that as it's unlikely you
will be able to hunt down every copyright holder now…
Beside that it is not even completely clear if GPL really forbids
linking against proprietary software in any case, given that it can
be kind of a stretch to say that linking is derived work. 
And libapt has quiet a few text-interfaces (acquire, resolver, …)
so certain parts can be proprietary without linking…
Sidenote: libdpkg is GPL, too, as far as i can see.