Re: Can LGPL be used for non-libraries

[Isaac]

On Mon, 27 Feb 2006 22:37:41 +0200, Daniel Qarras <dqarras@yahoo.com> wrote:
>>>>>Sorry for being pedantic here but I am considering to use LGPL for a 
>>>>>software package that is not a software library in any sense and 
>>>>>therefore I would need to know exactly how to do it when LGPL is 
>>>>>actually requiring modifications to be software libraries.
>>>>
>>>>What rights are hoping to allow people to take advantage of that
>>>>are not available under the GPL?  
>>>
>>>The right to modify a non-library that is licensed under the
>>>Library GPL. How can I satisty LGPL 2a) that says:
>>>"The modified work must itself be a software library."
>>>when the original clealry is not a software library?
>> 
>> Are you speaking for Daniel or as one of Daniel's users?
> 
> Neither, but that's irrelevant here.
> 
>> From the user perspective even a non library work can be compiled as a 
>> library 
>> with no changes to the source.  Some modification or additions might be 
>> needed
>> to make that library reasonable useful.  Thus there is no inconsistency with 
>> releasing a non library work under the LGPL.  Perhaps for you 2a) is not 
>> useful because you do not want to release a modified library.
>> 
>> If you don't like those choices the LGPL allows you to instead distribute 
>> the modified code under the GPL if the final work is not a library.
> 
> I guess you miss the point here. I was originally asking whether LGPL 
> can be used for non-libraries or not, including also modified versions, 
> not about any other possible choices. I again refer to the examples I 

And the answer to the question is that of course the copyright holder
can use the LGPL for any code he so chooses.  That does not answer the
question of whether some else can distribute the modified program code under
the LGPL.

IMO the LGPL does not specifically allow distributing modified non library
versions of programs under the LGPL.  However perhaps the copyright holders
do not care.

Isaac