Re: Further on MEX

[David Bateman]

Soren Hauberg wrote:
> Hi,
>   I cannot comment on points 1-3, but
>
> son, 04 01 2009 kl. 15:27 +0530, skrev Aravindh Krishnamoorthy:
>   
> > Also on a related note:
> > 4. [matter-of-taste] I'd have liked a liboctavemex.so (with mx... MEX
> > functions) released under LGPL, but I'm not sure how strong supporters
> > of software-freedom and GPL the Octave team is. Would you pls. comment
> > on this?
> >     
>
> I think people have different feelings about this. The GPL encourages
> freedom much more than the LGPL, which IMHO is a good thing. But LGPL
> would have some practical benefits, such as being able to link with
> libraries that are Free, but not GPL compatible.
>
> That being said, I doubt that a move to LGPL is possible as it would
> require getting permission to relicense code written by many
> contributors. This is a tedious and time-consuming task, that also would
> require legal expertise. I doubt that anybody would want to work on such
> a task, even if it was decided that LGPL would be good. Also, Octave
> links to quite a few libraries that are only GPL, which makes Octave
> "inherit" this license.
>
> Soren
>
>
>
>   
The thread contains some of the thought along these lines.

http://www.nabble.com/Private-company-and-code-salvation-to19676490.html

also

http://www-old.cae.wisc.edu/pipermail/octave-maintainers/2008-September/008674.html

contain thoughts along these lines

D.


--
David Bateman                                address@hidden
35 rue Gambetta                              +33 1 46 04 02 18 (Home)
92100 Boulogne-Billancourt FRANCE            +33 6 72 01 06 33 (Mob)