>>Can we let this rest
I was trying to, although I hopefully added some value in answering the
source code distribution questions
MySQL++ is a derived work of MySQL. This is where you are perhaps the
one not up to speed with the FSF's definition of derived work. My C++
programs may also be derived from gLibc (in FSF definition of derived)
but the LGPL license accommodates this.
In defining derived works FSF looks not only at the technical aspects of
the integration, but also at the semantics of the integration, how much
intimacy there is between the two applications. MySQL++ cannot
standalone, it has no use or perhaps even functions without MySQL,
everything they have said to date would indicate MySQL++ is a derived
work of MySQL.
From the LGPL preamble:
"When a program is linked with a library, whether statically or using a
shared library, the combination of the two is legally speaking a
combined work, a derivative of the original library."
But I forgot that MySQL AB has covered you with the FOSS exception,
silly me, This allows you to keep your LGPL license even if you are a
derived work of a GPL work. Sorry for that confusion.
Though that doesn't address how it seems to allow a proprietary app to
call the lgpl and avoid the underlying gpl requirements.
Anyway, I'm happy to go away and see that I can learn from the FSF as to
this whole thing.
Again I appreciate your time.
From: Warren Young [mailto:mysqlpp@stripped]
Sent: Wednesday, November 09, 2005 4:14 PM
To: MySQL++ Mailing List
Subject: Re: License Question
Hardy, Allan wrote:
>>>Ah, no. The most restrictive license always obtains.
> Ok, now I will argue :)
> Actually I am not clear on how a derived work of an GPL product can be
> licensed under LGPL?
MySQL++ isn't a derivative work of MySQL, any more than your C++ program
is a derivative work of glibc. There is no MySQL code in MySQL++.
Please, can we give this a rest?
MySQL++ Mailing List
For list archives: http://lists.mysql.com/plusplus