There’s no such thing as retracting an e-mail, but I would like to do it.
Sorry for failing to realise how old the thread was before replying.
Best, Simon
On 10.10.20 14:11, Simon Albrecht wrote:
Dear Karsten and list,
On 22.09.20 22:40, Karsten Reincke wrote:
5) I've learned, that all(?) of you consider this an untenable if not
silly position and that the PDFs and midi-files compiled by Lilypond
are never affected by the strong copyleft effect of the GPL. That's
good to hear. But I don't understand, why - under this circumstances
- it should be garbage to add a respective clarifying statement (the
'include clause' or however you want to name it), if it is at least
partially conceivable that such a position will be taken and if all
of you do not want to use / establish its consequences. But that's my
problem.
I would like to join in asking this question, namely what’s the reason
not to add such an ‘include clause’? (Am I correct in gathering that
LGPL basically means GPL + such an include clause?)
Best,
Simon
