I suppose it's just aggregation. Maybe we need to get rid of the bit that says, "overall licensed LGPL". Is that still permitted, when some component of the distro is GPL?
Actually the reason for me wanting to perhaps get rid of the demos was more to do with the fact that I don't know anyone who uses them. Very clear examples in the documentation would probably be much more useful. Anyhow, it's no big deal. Just an idea. I suppose the thing that set off that thought process for me was Brian saying it took forever to check out MPIR via his internet connection. We are carrying some fat. There's no reason to not have the demos on the website. Can't come up with as clear a case for leaving them in the library source. Bill. 2009/3/21 Gonzalo Tornaria <torna...@gmail.com>: > > On Fri, Mar 20, 2009 at 2:18 PM, Bill Hart <goodwillh...@googlemail.com> > wrote: >> >> Well we'll eventually replace with our own. Some of the demos are >> actually GPL as well. We should dump those too. > > Why? Only the parts that are linked with applications need to be LGPL. > > As long as those files/directories are clearly marked as GPL-licensed, > it should be ok, right? I mean, given that the library is completely > independent of the demos and benchmark code, this should count as > "mere aggregation"... > > Gonzalo > > > > --~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~ You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "mpir-devel" group. To post to this group, send email to mpir-devel@googlegroups.com To unsubscribe from this group, send email to mpir-devel+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/mpir-devel?hl=en -~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---
