On Wed, Nov 05, 2008 at 01:00:03PM +0100, Alexandre Alapetite wrote: > Hello, > I will study the GNU/LPGL v3 and update to this licence shortly, that > is today or tomorrow, on > http://alexandre.alapetite.net/doc-alex/domxml-php4-php5/
Hi Alexandre, Thanks for your quick reply. > > If this licence is not satisfactory for my case, I will fall back to a > licence explicitly compatible with GNU/LGPL such as CeCILL-C > http://www.cecill.info/licences.en.html CeCILL is indeed compliant with the (L)GPL: http://www.cecill.info/faq.fr.html#compatible > > My wish is to use a licence ensuring that modifications of this > specific library are published under an Open Source licence, without > forcing the rest of the software using it to be published. It should > also be compatible with the French legislation > > Any advice or documentation in this regard would be appreciated. Well, I am not a lawyer, but I can tell you the following points: - What you describe seems the be the exact definition of the LGPL: your library would be free software (and modifications *must* stay as free software, since making a derivative work does not allow you to re-license it without the author's agreement. - The difference between the GPL and LGPL is exactly the fact that the first forces you to publish the entire application as free software, not the second (only the library covered by the LGPL). The LGPL is best suited for libraries. - Contrary to some common beliefs, the GPL (and LGPL) seems to be valid in France. See http://crao.net/gpl/interview.html and http://www.pcinpact.com/actu/news/37313-GPL-GNU-licence-libre.htm - CeCILL would be fine HTH, Pierre _______________________________________________ Glpi-user mailing list [email protected] https://mail.gna.org/listinfo/glpi-user
