Re: lgpl compatible files archive?

[Simon Josefsson]

address@hidden (Karl Berry) writes:

>     [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?

Mostly, yes.  I had some additional requirements, such as that all
code had to be thread safe and that gettext should be an optional
dependency.  But those things seem to be possible to solve within
gnulib.  Actually, even the license problems I had was possible to
solve within gnulib.

> 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.

Right.  I realized it was better to work within gnulib to change the
license on the modules I actually needed.  This was successful for
several modules.

Currently, I think the only module I still use from lessergnulib is
getline.  I recall making a few stabs at trying to make it available
under LGPL within gnulib, but there was probably too much fine details
and I didn't finish it.  I'll work on it again eventually.

Thanks,
Simon