3 ms·
Author of this article is missing LGPL entirely. LGPL allows anyone to ensure that all changes to his code are published freely, but also allows packaging with
by mkup 14y ago
Author of this article is missing LGPL entirely. LGPL allows anyone to ensure that all changes to his code are published freely, but also allows packaging with commercial closed-source code into single downloadable file (unlike GPL).
- jrmg 14y agoThat's not entirely true. The LGPL requires that the end user be able to re-link the product with an API-compatible version of the LGPL-licensed library. On platforms that support dynamic linking this is easy to allow - just package the LGPLed library as a dynamic library the user can easily replace. On platforms that don't (e.g. iOS) it's harder, and I believe it's still 'gray' what's required in practise - or even if the requirement is possible to satisfy. Some will say if you supply object files so that the end user can relink, that's fine.
- IWentToTheWoods 14y ago>Some will say if you supply object files so that the end user can relink, that's fine. It's not "some will say"; supplying object files for your code and source for the LGPL library is specifically listed as an option in the LGPL itself.
- jrmg 14y agoyes - but that option is followed with "...so that the user can modify the Library and then relink to produce a modified executable containing the modified Library." [LGPL 2.1, section 6a] Can an iOS user do that? I would not like to depend on saying "Yes" to a court.