Has anyone checked:
http://www.gnu.org/philosophy/why-not-lgpl.html
I read it. It seems a good discussion of GPL issues as they relate to libraries.
What do you see as the implications for the MC IDE?
GNU use LGPL (lesser GLP) for libraries - and the reasons they argue here are specific to their overal strategy of giving open source software an edge over closed source solutions - most of the arguments do not apply to our situation as we have a closed engine.
As per my previous post - replace 'library' with 'MC IDE' and the artilces at gnu.org covering the two main licences make more sense.
The important point is that you are not allowed to distribute GPL code with any closed compnents that the GPL code 'links to'. In my reading this is exactly what the code in the MC IDE does, which means the license would prevent you using the code (or to be more precise distibuting the code with any applications you create).
That is why AFAIK we have to use LGPL (or a similar) for the MC IDE and aany open source libraries that are released.
_______________________________________________ metacard mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://lists.runrev.com/mailman/listinfo/metacard
