Re: Commercial or closed-source software with GNUStep?

[David Chisnall]

On 20 Jan 2011, at 16:55, Omar Campos wrote:

>   Is it possible (i.e. legal) to develop commercial or closed source software 
> with GNUstep? Not plan that I plan to, I'm just curious about it.


GNUstep uses the LGPL, which means that any changes that you make to the core 
library must be provided to anyone that you provide binaries too[1].  You must 
also provide the ability for users to link your (non-LGPL) code against a 
modified version of GNUstep[3].  This is most commonly done by linking against 
the shared library version of GNUstep.  If you statically link (I've never seen 
anyone do this, but it's probably possible) then you must either provide source 
or object code for your app.

Beyond that, there are no restrictions on the use of GNUstep in Free Software 
or proprietary systems.  We've received some significant contributions from 
people using GNUstep in proprietary deployments.  I think most of us would 
prefer that all software is open, but if people are going to write proprietary 
code anyway then we'd rather that they use GNUstep and help us improve it than 
that they use .NET (for example).

David

[1] As with other FSF licenses, the LGPL is horribly ambiguous when applied to 
languages other than C[2], so it's not entirely clear as to whether this 
applies to categories on GNUstep classes in other compilation units, and you'd 
need a court ruling to actually decide this, but it's probably safe to assume 
that it doesn't.

[2] GPLv3 is marginally better in this regard, but GNUstep, and GNUstep uses 
LGPLv2.1 or later, so if you abide by the conditions of LGPLv3 then you may 
find that clarifies matters for you.  It's been a while since I read LGPLv3 
though and I seem to remember that it is still somewhat unclear.

[3] This clause is routinely violated by users of LGPL'd code.  Take a look at 
the iOS App Store for a few thousand examples.

-- Sent from my Apple II