Martin v. Löwis <mar...@v.loewis.de> added the comment: [Replying to msg106566]
> if you're already looking at issue6715, then I don't get why you're > asking.. ;) Can you please submit a contributor form? > Martin: For LGPL (or even GPL for that matter, disregarding linking > restrictions) libraries you don't have to distribute the sources of > those libraries at all (they're already made available by others, so > that would be quite overly redundant, uh?;). LGPL actually doesn't > even care at all about the license of your software as long as you > only dynamically link against it. Of course you do. Quoting from the LGPL "You may convey a Combined Work ... if you also do each of the following: ... d) Do one of the following: 0) Convey the Minimal Corresponding Source under the terms of this License, and the Corresponding Application Code in a form suitable for, and under terms that permit, the user to recombine or relink the Application with a modified version of the Linked Version to produce a modified Combined Work, in the manner specified by section 6 of the GNU GPL for conveying Corresponding Source. 1) [not applicable to Windows] " > I don't really get what the issue would be even if liblzma were still > LGPL, it doesn't prohibit you from distributing a dynamically linked > library along with python either if necessary (which of course would > be of convenience on win32..).. Of course I can distribute a copy of an lzma DLL. However, I would have to provide ("convey") a copy of the source code of that DLL as well. ---------- nosy: +loewis _______________________________________ Python tracker <rep...@bugs.python.org> <http://bugs.python.org/issue6715> _______________________________________ _______________________________________________ Python-bugs-list mailing list Unsubscribe: http://mail.python.org/mailman/options/python-bugs-list/archive%40mail-archive.com