Re: GPLv3

[Shai Ayal]

Do we need all the libraries we link to to be GPLv3 compatible? Isn't
it just the libraries we distribute that need to be compatible?

In the graphics section I will be adding:
freetype which has a BSD like license which shouldn't be a problem,
fltk which is LGPLv2 with some restrictions lifted -- this could be a problem.
FTGL - BSD like or LGPLv2
gl2ps - GPLv2 or later
URW fonts - GPLv2 for whatever that means for fonts

Shai

On 9/14/07, John W. Eaton <address@hidden> wrote:
> On 14-Sep-2007, Thomas Weber wrote:
>
> | I just looked trough the differenent License files in suitesparse and
> | they all seem to be GPL or LGPL, but all with "or any later
> | version"-option.
>
> Where do you see that statement?  Normally the statement only appears
> in the distributed files themselves, not the license file, except that
> if you just grepped for "later" you might be confused by the example
> at the end of the GPL/LGPL that describes how to apply the licenses to
> your programs.  I think that is the only part of the license files
> that contains the clause, and that is not part of the license itself.
>
> jwe
>