Return-Path: <donaldp@locus.apache.org>
Mailing-List: contact ant-user-help@jakarta.apache.org; run by ezmlm
Delivered-To: mailing list ant-user@jakarta.apache.org
Received: (qmail 58841 invoked from network); 21 Oct 2000 04:51:28 -0000
Received: from mail.alphalink.com.au (203.24.205.7)
  by locus.apache.org with SMTP; 21 Oct 2000 04:51:28 -0000
Received: from donalgar (d281-ps2-mel.alphalink.com.au [202.161.108.27])
	by mail.alphalink.com.au (8.9.3/8.9.3) with SMTP id PAA32460
	for <ant-user@jakarta.apache.org>; Sat, 21 Oct 2000 15:51:24 +1000
Message-Id: <3.0.6.32.20001021155048.0087e620@latcs4.cs.latrobe.edu.au>
X-Sender: pjdonald@latcs4.cs.latrobe.edu.au
X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Light Version 3.0.6 (32)
Date: Sat, 21 Oct 2000 15:50:48 +1000
To: ant-user@jakarta.apache.org
From: Peter Donald <donaldp@locus.apache.org>
Subject: Re: licensing (was: Ant gui tool)
In-Reply-To: <m3bsweq0ae.fsf@workstation.mn.mtu.net>
References: <Peter Donald's message of "Sat, 21 Oct 2000 11:06:14 +1000">
 <3.0.6.32.20001021015512.008607e0@latcs4.cs.latrobe.edu.au>
 <3.0.6.32.20001021110614.00a3f1b0@latcs4.cs.latrobe.edu.au>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
X-Spam-Rating: locus.apache.org 1.6.2 0/1000/N

>Here's a positive such email I got:
>-- start copy --
>Jon Schewe wrote:
>
>> I'm working on writing a java preprocessor and would like to use two
>> libraries that are licensed under LGPL in the program.  I also would like
>> to release my software under the APL(Apache Public License).  Part of the
>> reason for this is that I want to be able to create extra modules that for
>> an application that licensed under APL that use my application.  Is this
>> legal under the terms of LGPL?  Or do I need to use other libraries?  I
>> have read the LGPL and it appears that I can do this,
>
>If your software is a "work that uses the LGPL'ed libraries", than the LGPL
>permits linking your APL'ed code with it, as long as you obey the terms of
>the LGPL (e.g., by including the source of all LGPL'ed libraries in your
>distribution).
>
>
>BTW, I hope that you will choose to release your software under a dual
>license, such as (LGPL|APL).
>
>I ask this because the APL is incompatible with the GPL, and if someone
>wants to use your software in a GPL'ed program, they would not be permitted
>to do so if you released it solely under the APL.
>
>--- end copy ---

right - that discusses LGPL not GPL. It also did not mention points such as
what else you are linking to. 

It also did not indicate the date of this ? Because it *seems* that this is
recent ? A while back GNU stated that because of javas linking model LGPL
== GPL but from the above statement it seems that this has changed ? I went
searching for original docs stating this a while ago and noticed they had
disappeared - so maybe their opinion on this has changed.

Cheers,

Pete

*------------------------------------------------------*
| "Nearly all men can stand adversity, but if you want |
| to test a man's character, give him power."          |
|       -Abraham Lincoln                               |
*------------------------------------------------------*