Re: lgpl compatible files archive?

[Karl Berry]

    [lessergnulib]

I remember this discussion (somewhat), but I was and am a bit puzzled.
Is the only purpose is to make the functionality available under the
LGPL?

Because it does not seem good, or necessary, for the same routines to
exist in two different forms.  It does not increase freedom, because
anyone who wants LGPL can get it that way once the lesser version
exists.  So the GPL-only version would seem to serve no purpose.

It seems rather pedantic and weird to say "routine X is only licensed
under the GPL", force Simon or whoever to spend time writing an
alternate implementation of X under the LGPL, and then throw away either
the old GPL or new LGPL code in order to have a single source again.

What am I missing?

karl