[eigen] Re: LGPLv3 for a C++ Pure Template Library ?

BenoƮt Jacob jacob at math.jussieu.fr
Wed Feb 6 16:18:47 UTC 2008

On Wednesday 06 February 2008 13:24:21 Michael Kesper wrote:
> Why don't you adress licensing at fsf.org ?

Because I didn't know about this list -- despite having looked for "licensing" 
and "mailing lists" on the fsf.org website.

Anyway I have looked into this issue more closely in the meanwhile, and have 
concluded by myself that the LGPLv3 does solve the problems of the LGPLv2 
with respect to #included C++ code.


-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: signature.asc
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 189 bytes
Desc: This is a digitally signed message part.
URL: <http://lists.fsfe.org/pipermail/discussion/attachments/20080206/d37abb94/attachment.sig>

More information about the Discussion mailing list