OK, I'm not a lawyer, but ... :-)
LGPL (but not GPL) code can be included (or linked at compile time) in
commercial code and it doesn't open-source the commercial code. To
quote from the GNU itself:
http://www.gnu.org/licenses/why-not-lgpl.html
"The GNU Project has two principal licenses to use for libraries. One
is the GNU Lesser GPL; the other is the ordinary GNU GPL. The choice
of license makes a big difference: using the Lesser GPL permits use of
the library in proprietary programs; using the ordinary GPL for a
library makes it available only for free programs."
This is why the GNU C library is LGPL:
"This is why we used the Lesser GPL for the GNU C library. After all,
there are plenty of other C libraries; using the GPL for ours would
have driven proprietary software developers to use another—no problem
for them, only for us."
A commercial/proprietary application can be compiled with GCC and
linked with the GNU C library and still be proprietary.
That being said, I don't know the official Apache stance on the matter
at the moment. However, even if Cayenne Modeler were proprietary and
used LGPL code, that would not change the proprietary nature of the
application. Of course, CM is not proprietary and I can't imagine how
utilizing a library or another tool that is LPGL would change the ASF
licensing of CM since LPGL doesn't change the licensing of proprietary
software. I do believe the LPGL wants it to be known that the
application (CM in this case) utilizes LPGL software and maybe that is
the issue ASF would have? Perhaps I'm missing something, though.
From the GPL FAQ:
If a library is released under the GPL (not the LGPL), does that mean
that any program which uses it has to be under the GPL?
Yes, because the program as it is actually run includes the library.
(note that it is mentioning GPL vs LGPL there)
and:
How does the LGPL work with Java?
See http://www.fsf.org/licensing/licenses/lgpl-java.html for
details. It works as designed, intended, and expected.
/dev/mrg
On 10/29/07, Andrus Adamchik <andru..bjectstyle.org> wrote:
> Tom started an ASF vs. LGPL discussion with the AppFramework project
> (that is mainly being developed by sun). If anybody thinks that
> AppFramework is a technology important enough for the Modeler and is
> willing to argue why an ASF/BSD/MIT license is a good thing for them,
> here is a link:
>
> https://appframework.dev.java.net/servlets/ReadMsg?list=users&msgNo=1210
>
> While the framework looks nice, I haven't evaluated it for real yet,
> besides that'll likely start a flame war, so I am staying away from
> it myself :-)
>
> Andrus
>
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.0.0 : Tue Oct 30 2007 - 13:39:00 EDT