On 17 May 2000, Daniel Quinlan wrote: > >>> Who is going to explain this to Mr. Stallman ? > > >> I think he already understands. For libraries that must achieve > >> extremely wide deployment, and for which the GPL is too restrictive, > >> he has devised the LGPL. > > Shaya Potter <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > > > Actually I think he doesn't look at it this same wasy was you. The LGPL > > (in his view) is when their's already good "closed" versions of that > > library, so that if you'd GPL the library no one would use it b/c of the > > "viral" nature, since they have alternatives. The GPL should be used in > > all other cases. > > > > see http://www.fsf.org/philosophy/why-not-lgpl.html > > It's a free country, we can have our own view. If it allows us to > meet our goals more easily, we should have our own view.
I totally agree. (as well as with the opinion on not relying on GPL'd libs) Shaya Potter
