3 ms·
The FSF has a whole article on why you'd choose GPL or LGPL [0]. In general they agree with you that LGPL is overused, but they do identify a few reasons why yo
by lolinder 1y ago
The FSF has a whole article on why you'd choose GPL or LGPL [0]. In general they agree with you that LGPL is overused, but they do identify a few reasons why you might choose LGPL.
That said, if the other option is something like MPL then I can think of a number of reasons why LGPL is better. At least LGPL ensures that modifications to your library itself remain free, whereas a more permissive license allows changes to be locked up entirely in a proprietary fork.
[0] https://www.gnu.org/licenses/why-not-lgpl.en.html https://www.gnu.org/licenses/why-not-lgpl.en.html
- zigzag312 1y agoDoesn't MPL require to release any modifications made to the library itself?
- lolinder 1y agoOh, yes, I missed that! You're correct. It's still more permissive than LGPL in that it isn't 'infectious' even when statically linked, the license only applies to the source file, not to any derived work. That makes the requirements more straightforward but does limit the freedom of the user to dynamically swap the library out for one that they'd prefer.
- kragen 1y agoNot if you put them in a new source code file, no.