On Jan 24, 2008 4:30 AM, Trustin Lee <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Oops, forgot to reply to 'all'. > > On Jan 24, 2008 6:29 PM, Trustin Lee <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > Hi, > > > > Thanks everyone for the detailed interpretation. If Henry understood > > our policy correctly, does it mean that it's OK if the build of the > > submodule that depends on RXTX doesn't occur automatically but with > > some interactive precedure with proper notice? > > > > Thanks, > > Trustin
That would not be OK if RXTX were under the GPL, for example. The current draft makes no distinction between LGPL and GPL. I've heard statements that LGPL (as of version 2) is OK for C and C-like programming languages, but not for direct references from languages like Java, but indirect references through standard interfaces (such as JDBC) are OK. So far, none of that is reflected in the current draft, nor would it apply to usage of RXTX by MINA. I've also heard a statement the the FSF has somehow clarified this for Java, but can not find any evidence that backs this up. Can anybody provide a link? - Sam Ruby
