[Top][All Lists]

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

Re: [Chicken-users] faster threading

From: Tobia Conforto
Subject: Re: [Chicken-users] faster threading
Date: Sun, 2 Nov 2008 12:42:11 +0100

John Cowan wrote:
felix winkelmann scripsit:
Ugh. Sorry, not compatible.

Sure it's compatible. LGPL code can be used as part of a larger work under any license: it is not viral.

It's not strictly viral, but some of its terms would place additional burden on Chicken users, that Felix might deem unacceptable.

Here is my own interpretation, based on the text of the LGPL v3.

I'm neither advocating the inclusion of rbtree.scm nor its rejection. This mail is meant to save Felix's and others' time, by explaining in a clear way the restrictions posed by including LPGL code in Chicken.

Notes to section 0.

"The Library" is rbtree.scm
"Combined work" are both Chicken itself and any program compiled with Chicken. "Applications" means all work put into Chicken and into any program compiled with it, except for the file rbtree.scm
"Minimal Corresponding Source" is the file rbtree.scm

Notes to section 2.

rbtree.scm must not depend on Applications (the rest of Chicken, or programs compiled with it) meaning that interactions between the two parts must be limited to Applications calling rbtree's API.

Notes to section 3.

Combined works (again, both Chicken and programs compiled with it) cannot be conveyed under a license that restricts modifications to the rbtree.scm part of the work, or that restricts reverse engineering for debugging such modifications.

Moreover, they must be conveyed in a form suitable for relinking with a modified version of rbtree.scm. This means that all programs statically linked with Chicken must also be distributed in object code, to allow relinking with a different version of rbtree.scm

All copyright notices displayed during execution, both in Chicken and programs compiled with it, must state that the work uses rbtree.scm and that it's covered by the LPGL and where to find the license text.

John, I'd appreciate your input on whether my interpretation is correct.


reply via email to

[Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread]