On Jun 23 09:48, Warren Young wrote:
> On Jun 23, 2016, at 6:18 AM, Corinna Vinschen wrote:
> >
> > From 2.5.2 onwards, the Cygwin DLL is now available under the GNU LGPL v3,
> > rather
> > than the former GPLv3.
>
> I have mixed feelings about this.
>
&g
On Jun 23, 2016, at 6:18 AM, Corinna Vinschen wrote:
>
> From 2.5.2 onwards, the Cygwin DLL is now available under the GNU LGPL v3,
> rather
> than the former GPLv3.
I have mixed feelings about this.
On the one hand, it means we get the same freedoms when deploying GCC-compiled
Hi folks,
I'm pleased to announce that the today's upcoming release of the Cygwin
library (version 2.5.2) introduces a license change. From 2.5.2
onwards, the Cygwin DLL is now available under the GNU LGPL v3, rather
than the former GPLv3.
The official Red Hat announcem
> Christopher Faylor writes:
>
> > I have little say in the matter anymore but I'd say that
> this is about
> > as possible as me suddenly becoming un-mean.
>
> The interesting question now is, would these be related incidents ;-)
MSNBC News - this just in : the GPL makes people mean! News at
On Wed, Apr 21, 2004 at 09:47:02AM +0200, Jan Nieuwenhuizen wrote:
>Christopher Faylor writes:
>>I have little say in the matter anymore but I'd say that this is about
>>as possible as me suddenly becoming un-mean.
>
>The interesting question now is, would these be related incidents ;-)
I have no
> -Original Message-
> From: cygwin-owner On Behalf Of Christopher Faylor
> Sent: 21 April 2004 03:05
> On Tue, Apr 20, 2004 at 08:51:15PM -0400, Larry Hall wrote:
> >At 08:17 PM 4/20/2004, you wrote:
> >>Will the cygwin.dll become LGPL at one time in the
> -Original Message-
> From: cygwin-owner On Behalf Of Bart van der Werf (Bluelive)
> Sent: 21 April 2004 01:17
> Will the cygwin.dll become LGPL at one time in the future?
> The viral GPL clause really makes me not want to use it with my BSD
> licensed applicatio
On Apr 21 02:17, Bart van der Werf (Bluelive) wrote:
> Will the cygwin.dll become LGPL at one time in the future?
> The viral GPL clause really makes me not want to use it with my BSD
> licensed application.
Your problem. Read http://cygwin.com/licensing.html again:
"In a
Christopher Faylor writes:
> I have little say in the matter anymore but I'd say that this is about
> as possible as me suddenly becoming un-mean.
The interesting question now is, would these be related incidents ;-)
Jan.
--
Jan Nieuwenhuizen <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> | GNU LilyPond - The music type
On Tue, Apr 20, 2004 at 08:51:15PM -0400, Larry Hall wrote:
>At 08:17 PM 4/20/2004, you wrote:
>>Will the cygwin.dll become LGPL at one time in the future?
>
>Anything is possible but there is no plan to do this.
I have little say in the matter anymore but I'd say that this
At 08:17 PM 4/20/2004, you wrote:
>Will the cygwin.dll become LGPL at one time in the future?
Anything is possible but there is no plan to do this.
--
Larry Hall http://www.rfk.com
RFK Partners, Inc. (508) 893-9779 - RFK Office
838 Washing
On Wed, 21 Apr 2004, Bart van der Werf (Bluelive) wrote:
> Will the cygwin.dll become LGPL at one time in the future?
> The viral GPL clause really makes me not want to use it with my BSD
> licensed application.
(Furthering the FUD about the GPL being "viral" could cause a l
Will the cygwin.dll become LGPL at one time in the future?
The viral GPL clause really makes me not want to use it with my BSD
licensed application.
Grtz, Bart
--
Unsubscribe info: http://cygwin.com/ml/#unsubscribe-simple
Problem reports: http://cygwin.com/problems.html
13 matches
Mail list logo