DFSG conform OSI licenses

2007-09-01 Thread Soeren Sonnenburg
Dear all, the recent discussion about 'Firebird being in main' caused even more confusion on my side, as the sites [1], [2] (which I consider the debian-official statement wrt. which license is DFSG compliant) do not list the MPL as a DFSG conform license but as DFSG-incompatible [1]. Also the con

Re: DFSG conform OSI licenses

2007-09-01 Thread Marco d'Itri
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: >the recent discussion about 'Firebird being in main' caused even more >confusion on my side, as the sites [1], [2] (which I consider the >debian-official statement wrt. which license is DFSG compliant) do not >list the MPL as a DFSG conform license but as DFSG-incompatibl

Re: DFSG conform OSI licenses

2007-09-01 Thread Soeren Sonnenburg
On Sat, 2007-09-01 at 12:05 +0200, Marco d'Itri wrote: > [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: > > >the recent discussion about 'Firebird being in main' caused even more > >confusion on my side, as the sites [1], [2] (which I consider the > >debian-official statement wrt. which license is DFSG compliant) do no

Licensing a work using a GPL-ed library under the LGPL

2007-09-01 Thread Shriramana Sharma
Hello. The matrix under http://www.fsf.org/licensing/licenses/gpl-faq.html#AllCompatibility says that a work using a GPL-ed library can be licensed under the LGPL "if you convert to GPL". For example the KDE libraries which use the GPL-ed Qt libraries are themselves licensed under the LGPL.