Op Tue, 26 Dec 2006, schreef Graeme Geldenhuys:
> Hi,
>
> In August I asked a similar question (LGPL vs BSD) and got a lengthy
> discussion going, which helped me a lot in understanding the
> difference.
>
> Now, what is the difference between the Modified LGPL (as used in FPC
> and Lazarus) compared to MPL.
>
> Don't they really mean the same thing.
>
> * Code modifications must be made public
> * Commercial software may be created without releasing source when
> linking to libraries. Again, not sure about static linking in MPL?
> * plus point of MPL is you don't get confusion between GPL and LGPL.
> Many just see GPL and stay away...
Yes, but, LGPL is compatible with GPL, MPL is not. So, if the RTL would
have been MPL, we would not have been able to GPL the compiler. There is
one exception in the GPL, and that is linking to non-GPL system libraries,
the RTL can perhaps be considered a system library. It would still be
doable though.
Still, the MPL is totally unusable because of one clause: "This license
shall be governed by California law provisions". As all FPC developers
except Carl are in Europe, it is doubtfull wether Californian law can
apply to us at all, but for certain is that it wouldn't be very wise to
move all legal issues to a place far, far away.
Daniël
_______________________________________________
fpc-devel maillist - fpc-devel@lists.freepascal.org
http://lists.freepascal.org/mailman/listinfo/fpc-devel
