[sword-devel] GPL and non GPL

Leon Brooks sword-devel@crosswire.org
Tue, 10 Sep 2002 12:36:08 +0800

On Tue, 10 Sep 2002 11:46, Chris Little wrote:
> On Tue, 10 Sep 2002, Leon Brooks wrote:
>> On Mon, 9 Sep 2002 23:26, Chris Little wrote:
>>> On Mon, 9 Sep 2002, Leon Brooks wrote:
>>>> LGPL will achieve this directly. Wrapping a CLI program ("engine")
>>>> with a proprietary GUI will also achieve this with fully GPLed
>>>> software.

>>> I think you missed the point.  We can't put something under LGPL that
>>> is non-GPL.

>> Freeware can be GPLed; BSD code can be GPLed with a rider enforcing the
>> acknowledgement terms a la BSD.

> My apologies. I mis-stated that.  What I meant was that we can't put
> something under LGPL that IS GPL.

Sorry, but I'm still confused. Didn't you just finish arguing that there was 
no practical difference between GPL and LGPL?

> That's why we need to get rid of GPL
> stuff in our library for which we do not ourselves hold the copyright.

Hmmm. Perhaps there's a little more context hovering around the fringes of 
this proposition that somehow I missed. Can you think of any hidden 
assumptions or missing background information that might help me to 

AFAICT, the only standing reason for aceing GPLed modules would be to replace 
them with more functional ones. In this case, a regex which understands 
UTF-8, hopefully also full UniCode, and might even be faster and more POSIXly 
correct into the bargain seems in order, one which is either (L)GPL or can be 
converted to same in order to preserve its freedom.

Cheers; Leon