Recent Features
| |||||||||||||
LGPL is NOT compatible with Cygwin's license (GPL+exceptions)LGPL is NOT compatible with Cygwin's license (GPL+exceptions)Posted Nov 20, 2008 12:21 UTC (Thu) by fuhchee (subscriber, #40059)In reply to: LGPL is NOT compatible with Cygwin's license (GPL+exceptions) by rwmj Parent article: MinGW and why Linux users should care
nor do we want to discriminate against them by making them buy a special license Since you consider licensing-based incentives to create free software as discrimination, what prevented you from (say) releasing libvirt into the public domain?
(Log in to post comments)
LGPL is NOT compatible with Cygwin's license (GPL+exceptions) Posted Nov 20, 2008 12:35 UTC (Thu) by rwmj (subscriber, #5474) [Link]
LGPL protects the libvirt code while not imposing itself on other code that we didn't write.
As a free software developer yourself, you should know the difference between public domain, LGPL
LGPL is NOT compatible with Cygwin's license (GPL+exceptions) Posted Nov 20, 2008 12:36 UTC (Thu) by nix (subscriber, #2304) [Link]
This is a *management layer*. It's going to get used by people who have existing virtualization systems and want to manage them. Nobody, but nobody is going to say 'hey! my management layer uses GPL, so I should switch virtualization systems to one that is GPL!'. They'll just not use libvirt.
This is a classic example of a library that is better LGPLed than GPLed.
|
|||||||||||||