naryl a écrit :
Don Wrote:
Well, since Qt is going to use the lunatic# LGPL license, you have to
use a DLL anyway for commercial use.
# lunatic because of the prohibition against static linking. I cannot
understand why anyone would use such an absolutely moronic license.
LGPL doesn't explicitly prohibits static linking. It serves to ensure that the
modified library can be replaced by other version at any time. And there's a
good reason for that.
Obviously you can't replace a library with other version if it's statically
linked. But nothing prohibits from distributing a product in object files. :)
I disagree: the LGPL is probably the most 'derived' license: because
developers don't like the stupid restriction on static linking they
change it..
Too bad as it creates a lot of different LGPL-like license.
That said, I know for sure that the LGPLv2 prevents static linking I
don't know about the LGPLv3 though.
BR,
renoX
