> 	Julie agreed, and uploaded a zip file of the current sources for me to
> integrate into the source tree...which I did...and then *very* quickly
> undid...PostODBC falls under LGPL, and therefore can't be included as part of
> our source distribution without contaminating our code :(
> 
> 	Does anyone know of *any* way around this?  Like, can a section of our
> distribution contain software that falls under LGPL without it affecting *our*
> copyright (Berkeley)?  Or does it have to remain completely seperate?  Its
> effectively a seperate package, but because its wrapped in our "tar" file
> for distribution, how does that affect things?
> 
> Marc G. Fournier                                
> Systems Administrator @ hub.org 
> primary: scrappy@hub.org           secondary: scrappy@{freebsd|postgresql}.org 
> 
> 
By LGPL, I assume you mean the library version of GPL. I thought that the whole
point of the library version was that it didn't contaminate any other code.
That's how commercial products can release executables which are linked with
the GNU libc (or whatever) without the whole product falling under the GPL.


Andrew

----------------------------------------------------------------------------
Dr. Andrew C.R. Martin                             University College London
EMAIL: (Work) martin@biochem.ucl.ac.uk    (Home) andrew@stagleys.demon.co.uk
URL:   http://www.biochem.ucl.ac.uk/~martin
Tel:   (Work) +44(0)171 419 3890                    (Home) +44(0)1372 275775

Wed, 7 Jan 1998 11:23:40 GMT
Andrew Martin <martin@biochemistry.ucl.ac.uk>
Re: [HACKERS] PostODBC...