Re: PROPOSAL: licensing guidelines
On 17 May 2000, Daniel Quinlan wrote:
> >>> Who is going to explain this to Mr. Stallman ?
> >> I think he already understands. For libraries that must achieve
> >> extremely wide deployment, and for which the GPL is too restrictive,
> >> he has devised the LGPL.
> Shaya Potter <firstname.lastname@example.org> writes:
> > Actually I think he doesn't look at it this same wasy was you. The LGPL
> > (in his view) is when their's already good "closed" versions of that
> > library, so that if you'd GPL the library no one would use it b/c of the
> > "viral" nature, since they have alternatives. The GPL should be used in
> > all other cases.
> > see http://www.fsf.org/philosophy/why-not-lgpl.html
> It's a free country, we can have our own view. If it allows us to
> meet our goals more easily, we should have our own view.
I totally agree. (as well as with the opinion on not relying on GPL'd