To
FPC-Pascal users discussions
cc
Subject
Re: [fpc-pascal] MPL, LGPL rehashed again
> > I'm part of the core developers for tiOPF and am pretty sure that if
> > we need to change tiOPF's license to a Modified LGPL or dual license
> > it, it should
2008/6/18 Jonas Maebe <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
>
> It simply says that you can again remove the static linking exception that
> we added to the LGPL.
Perfect! Thank you very much for your time...
Regards,
- Graeme -
___
fpGUI - a cross-platform Free P
On 18 Jun 2008, at 15:36, Graeme Geldenhuys wrote:
2008/6/18 Jonas Maebe <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
It means that you are free to relicense a file back to the regular
LGPL if
it was originally distributed under our modified LGPL.
Only back to the regular LGPL, or to any other license of choice
2008/6/18 Jonas Maebe <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
>
> It means that you are free to relicense a file back to the regular LGPL if
> it was originally distributed under our modified LGPL.
Only back to the regular LGPL, or to any other license of choice?
I presume only to the regular LGPL, otherwise it wil
On 18 Jun 2008, at 14:59, Graeme Geldenhuys wrote:
Below I quoted the Modified LGPL...
"As a special exception, the copyright holders of this library give
you permission to link this library with independent modules to
produce an executable, regardless of the license terms of these
independent
2008/6/18 Jonas Maebe <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
>
> If it's plain LGPL and you link it statically, then you have to supply all
> object files of the rest of your program to your customers (when they ask
> for it; and you have to inform them of this right they have, by including a
> copy of the LGPL with
On 18 Jun 2008, at 10:33, Marco van de Voort wrote:
I'm part of the core developers for tiOPF and am pretty sure that if
we need to change tiOPF's license to a Modified LGPL or dual license
it, it should be possible. Again, we link tiOPF directly into our
executable. Does this pose any issues f
> > I'm part of the core developers for tiOPF and am pretty sure that if
> > we need to change tiOPF's license to a Modified LGPL or dual license
> > it, it should be possible. Again, we link tiOPF directly into our
> > executable. Does this pose any issues for us?
>
> MPL is not (modified) LGPL c
On 13 Jun 2008, at 09:41, Graeme Geldenhuys wrote:
#1
FBLib uses the standard LGPL. We link that software directly into our
executables. We don't use it as an external (dynamically linked)
.so/.dll library. FBLib is pretty much a wrapper for the Firebird
libfbclient.so library. If this poses
