I just want to make it short. I was used to think that if I have to release a library to replace a non-free one, I will make them LGPL. Otherwise, I will make the work GPL. Now, after all this discussion, I think we need a more restrictive one, kind of intermediate between the GPL and LGPL, something I will be even more please to put my "uniquely-features" libraries (like libreadline) on.
It should be something like the LGPL but restricting the linked code to be also DFSG free. For this, the DFSG (or, for a better purpose, the OSD) should be made more "legal". I mean that if I license something as "This can be linked with any DFSG compliant software" will not make easily in court, with all the loopholes we know the DFSG contains. However, I should also add that any other restriction from the LGPL will apply. So, if you want to hardlink the library to your program or make modifications to the library itself, it should be made under the same license. Risk to be contaminated with more permissive or less well think license is too heavy to risk it. Just my 0.1573$ ------------------------------------------------------------------------ Fabien Ninoles Chevalier servant de la Dame Catherine des Rosiers aka Corbeau aka le Veneur Debian GNU/Linux maintainer E-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] WebPage: http://www.tzone.org/~fabien RSA PGP KEY [E3723845]: 1C C1 4F A6 EE E5 4D 99 4F 80 2D 2D 1F 85 C1 70 ------------------------------------------------------------------------
