@ 10/05/2004 16:44 : wrote Benjamin Cutler :
Humberto Massa wrote:
@ 10/05/2004 16:26 : wrote Benjamin Cutler :
>> **The library itself would be GPL.**
See below :-)
I just added some additional freedoms/terms for people who want to make
commercial/proprietary/closed source programs with it, as the GPL as I
understand it requires programs using GPL libraries to be GPL
themselves.
But only if those are non-commercial... I think I understand what you
want, some of the extra LGPL freedoms, but in a narrower way. You can
make it a GPL'd with exceptions, like:
"this library is distributed under the terms of the GNU GPL [[ , v2 or
later at your option ]]; as an exception, you can link any proprietary
program with this library or a modified version, PROVIDED said program
is distributed ABSOLUTELY GRATUITOUSLY, and not under any other
circumstances, AND the distribution of the library continues to abide
the terms of the GNU GPL. If you want to link your proprietary program
with this library, contact cutler(at)something, that is the original
copyrights holder, and ask for other terms of licensing". the part in
[[]] is optional.
I hope this helps you, but my recommendation is still... go GPL pure and
simple. I don't know if there is any good in making the library
available to the "freeware" gratuitous, non-DFSG-free software hordes... :-)
--
br,M
