Frank Küster <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > Michael Banck <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > >> On Thu, May 11, 2006 at 04:46:22PM +0200, martin f krafft wrote: >>> also sprach Kari Pahula <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> [2006.05.11.1535 +0200]: >>> > * License : GPL v2 or later >>> >>> That will make it pretty useless for non-GPL applications. >> >> Non-GPL compatible applications, you mean? > > Which non-GPL license can I choose for a software that uses this > library?
Any license that is compatible with the GPL, such as the revised BSD license. >> Seconds, since when do we consider the GPL to be viral? > > Don't know about you, but the FSF does - it has created the LGPL because > of this. That doesn't mean libraries shouldn't be licensed under the GPL, see <http://www.gnu.org/licenses/why-not-lgpl.html>. /Simon -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
