Re: [Bug-gnulib] module maintainers

[Paul Eggert]

address@hidden (Karl Berry) writes:

> Perhaps what we should do is keep the files that are mastered in gnulib
> under lgpl.  And then keep a copy of all them under the gpl
> (automatically updated of course).  Then gnulib users can pick whichever
> one they need.

That sounds reasonable.  We could have the lgpl copies under lib-lgpl,
for example.  I'd rather have the lib copies all be gpl'ed, though,
for convenience.

Bruno Haible writes:

> AFAIK there is no problem if you link an LGPL'ed .c file with one or
> more GPL'ed ones, is there?

It doesn't suffice simply to plop an LGPLed module directly into a
GPLed application.  The module's copyright notice says something like
"you should have a copy of the LGPL" and the app won't have a copy.
It's confusing, as it requires readers of the app source code to have
specialized legal knowledge.  Our longstanding tradition is to avoid
that sort of confusion using only the GPL for GPLed applications.