Lgpl why not

Each version is given a distinguishing version number. If the Library as you received it specifies that a proxy can decide whether future versions of the GNU Lesser General Public License shall apply, that proxy's public statement of acceptance of any version is permanent authorization for you to choose that version for the Library. Use to manage open source licenses, from the creators of tl;dr Legal. Log in with Facebook Log in with Google. Quick Summary This license is mainly applied to libraries.

Can Commercial Use. By releasing libraries that are limited to free software only, we can help each other's free software packages outdo the proprietary counterparts.

The whole free software movement will have more popularity, because free software as a whole will stack up better against the competition. We defend the rights of all software users. There are also other ways to contact the FSF. Free Software Supporter :. Set language. Copyright Infringement Notification. If you do that, you have to offer the source code of any LGPLed components.

If you are using GPLed components, you have to offer the source code of that component and anything that links against it. Even my Android phone includes the GPL license in the about menu.

This offer is valid for a period of three 3 years from the date of the distribution of this product by Sony Mobile. Finally, there is a replacement requirement for LGPLed libraries. It says that the user must be able to replace the LGPLed component with a modified version. For a. NET library it means that the user must be able to put a modified version of the library in the directory of the application and have the application use that.

For example with AuthServices, it means that the user must be able to upgrade to a later, compatible release that contains security fixes, without the involvement of the vendor of the application. Every now and then, I get a request to change the license of AuthServices to something else.

First of all, it would be very hard to do that, as I would have to gain consent from all the developers that have contributed to the library. But even if I could, you would first have to convince me. And so far, nobody who has requested a change of license has been able to explain why LGPL would be a problem. If you know any case where LGPL is a real stopper, please leave a comment to help me understand such a case. Robert Harvey k 54 54 gold badges silver badges bronze badges.

Why should it be released under LGPL? However, as Mason Wheeler mentioned, if the idea is to spread it as much as possible with lesser rules, I can understand the argument.

Add a comment. Active Oldest Votes. Improve this answer. Its only "infectious" if you want to sell the software, just using it is fine, and, if you are distributing for free then GPL is just fine too.

Just plain using it puts you under no obligation whatsoever. Jeremy non-GPL licenses have their own political positions. The first sentence is not clear. Those are weasel words. When did RMS ever force anybody to use his code or modify it? You have some funny ideas about freedom. Show 4 more comments.

In a very quick summary: GPL: if you use my code in yours, you must distribute your code as I do for mine; LGPL: if you modify my code, you must distribute your modifications. MIT: do what you want with my code excepted pretend that the code is yours Then there is the fine prints which may confuse the matter and the political goals of the FSF -- but some use the L GPL without sharing those.