nanogui: Request for comments - Microwindows
Subject:
RE: Request for comments - Microwindows
From:
"Vidar Hokstad" ####@####.####
Date:
4 Oct 1999 19:02:51 -0000
Message-Id: <19991004185856.15874.qmail@mail.relight.com>
On Mon, 4 Oct 1999 12:51:13 -0600 you wrote:
>
>: However, it does appear to kill the static model, but ONLY FOR NON-FREE
>: ROGRAMS. Free programs could still use the static model just fine, and
>: non-free programs could still use the client/server model, since the client
>: side is LGPL.
>:
>
>Well, we could always have LGPL for static model, otherwise
>GPL for server and LGPL for applications. If someone wants to develop
>a non-free program, and link it statically, we still let them
Yes, but it may still be too restrictive for some cases. We for instance
specifically have one case where we might end up licensing software from
a third party that they won't be willing to deliver object code for relinking
for, and that thus means that we can't use it with LGPL'd code either.
So for us the LGPL might end up being to restrictive. In my case though,
I don't expect us to statically link anything, so for us it might be
enough to dual license the client side library, but I'd expect the above
to be the case for a rather large part of the potential user base for
NanoGUI, and I'd prefer to support it.
Regards,
Vidar
