[OT] open-source license issues

spir denis.spir at gmail.com
Mon Apr 11 03:54:20 PDT 2011


On 04/11/2011 02:45 AM, Adam D. Ruppe wrote:
> Cliff Hudson wrote:
>> >  Have you considered wrapping something like DevIL?
> I actually didn't consider it; since I already have decent homegrown
> loaders for a few formats I figured that'd be good enough, for now
> at least.
>
> But, looking now, DevIL is LGPL. As I'm hoping to get into Phobos,
> that will mean licensing problems. Phobos should Just Work for
> endusers, meaning it ought to package everything it needs with it,
> with the exception of operating system libraries.
>
> Packaging the source for a big library to satisfy the LGPL won't
> really work there :-(

There is a point I don't understand: if I'm right, LGPL as well as all other 
"open source", not strictly free-software, licenses allow using licensed 
software even for "privative" (proprietary) work. But they wouldn't allow using 
software for work licensed under other open-source licenses like the Boost license?
Where's the bug?

Denis
-- 
_________________
vita es estrany
spir.wikidot.com



More information about the Digitalmars-d mailing list