[squeak-dev] Re: Swazoo - LGPL or MIT?
jason.johnson.081 at gmail.com
Fri Mar 21 15:44:05 UTC 2008
I don't think you're going to get that answer here.
How much work would it be to recode the parts of Swazoo that are under
LGPL so that they can be MIT?
On Fri, Mar 21, 2008 at 2:31 PM, Philippe Marschall
<philippe.marschall at gmail.com> wrote:
> 2008/3/19, Philippe Marschall <philippe.marschall at gmail.com>:
> > 2008/3/19, Janko Mivšek <janko.mivsek at eranova.si>:
> > > Paolo Bonzini wrote:
> > > >> Do I interpret the LGPL correctly that the Seaside Swazoo adapter
> > > >> (subclass of a a Swazoo class) would need to be LGPL as well?
> > > >
> > > > No, Site is pretty much the interface that Swazoo exposes to its users;
> > > > you cannot *use* Swazoo without subclassing Site. Subclassing
> > > > HeaderField would be another story.
> > >
> > >
> > > We had just recently a semi-official and a bit broader (and very simple
> > > actually) interpretation. Using it on Swazoo: LGPL is covered if you
> > > extend Swazoo by some other package as is in your case, Philippe. Reason
> > > IMHO is simple: borders between Swazoo and code it uses it is preserved
> > > and clear.
> > Sorry I have some problems parsing this. I need a clear and official
> > response whether the Swazoo Seaside Adapter needs to be under LGPL. If
> > not what changes we are allowed to make without it having to move to
> > LGPL.
> I need a clear, official and legal waterproof answer on this.
More information about the Squeak-dev