I had a read of the LGPL, a lawyer but linking is mentioned. "When a program is linked with a library, whether statically or using a shared library, the combination of the two is legally speaking a combined work, a derivative of the original library. The ordinary General Public License therefore permits such linking only if the entire combination fits its criteria of freedom. The Lesser General Public License permits more lax criteria for linking other code with the library.."
Now just find out what they mean by "criteria of freedom". On Mon, 15 Nov 2004 23:35:24 +0100, Dennis Lundberg <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Joe Germuska wrote: > > > >> i hate to do this to what is a good proposal but... > >> > >> isn't dumbster LGPL'd...? > > > > > > No. It's GPL. Which only makes it worse, right? > > > > http://sourceforge.net/projects/dumbster > > > > Dang viral licenses. And all the work that has been put into > > implementing Dumbster test cases! > > > > MockObjects is Apache-licensed, but the whole "alt.javax.mail" interface > > hierarchy has always kind of chafed me. Is it worth looking at it? > > Only javax.mail.Session is exposed in the current API at all, and that's > > only in a protected method. Maybe it wouldn't be as bad as it seems. > > > > Joe > > > Actually it seems that it is LGPL starting with version 1.1. At least > that's what the docs accompanying version 1.4 says. > > http://quintanasoft.com/dumbster/ > > -- > Dennis Lundberg > > > > > --------------------------------------------------------------------- > To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > > --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
