From: Warren Young
Date: August 6 2007 3:29pm
Subject: Re: MySQL++ licensing
List-Archive: http://lists.mysql.com/plusplus/6882
Message-Id: <46B73E47.2080300@etr-usa.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit

Axel Howind wrote:
> Warren Young schrieb:
>> Jeff Huston wrote:
>>>
>>> What happened to libmysqlpp.a ?
>>
>> Since the move to the new build system, we only generate shared 
>> libraries.  Due to the licensing of MySQL++, this is almost always the 
>> only one you're legally allowed to use anyway, so we don't have much 
>> incentive to provide a static library.
> 
> Sorry, but could you please explain this in more detail? The website 
> states MySQL++ is LGPL licensed, and whether I link my program 
> statically or dynamic, it is a derived work according to the LGPL.

No, that's the GPL you're thinking of.  (The MySQL C API library is 
GPL'd, but that's a separate matter I won't cover here.)

The LGPL was created for libraries like MySQL++, to permit you to link 
non-free programs to them as long as you use dynamic linking.  The 
purpose of the LGPL is to permit someone to modify their copy of the 
LGPL'd library (MySQL++ in this case) independently of your program, 
thus preserving the freedoms intended by the creators of that library.

Think of MySQL++ the same way you'd think of glibc or libstdc++ on a 
Linux system.  You can build programs that link against these libraries 
dynamically without forcing them to use the LGPL.  Only linking 
statically triggers the "viral" aspects of the LGPL.

Understand this, however: the company I work for owns the copyright on 
the parts of MySQL++ I have written, and others also hold copyrights on 
substantial portions of MySQL++.  My opinions on this matter, though 
unquestionably brilliant, will be worth about as much in a legal battle 
as you've paid to receive them.  If you are making important business 
decisions, base it on the opinion of a lawyer.

> As to why we prefer the static lib: 

Take it as a fact that changing the license for MySQL++ at this late 
date would be as difficult as changing the inscriptions on the mile 
markers along the Appian Way.

Given that, your preference has no relevance.  You aren't making a 
feature request, you are asking a legal question.  Discussing your 
preference in this matter is just as likely to get something changed as 
discussing your preference to drive 55 in a school zone with a traffic 
judge.