On Fri, 2 Nov 2012 17:23:43 +0100 Michael Banck wrote: > Hi, > > thanks for your answer. You're welcome! > > On Fri, Nov 02, 2012 at 04:49:08PM +0100, Francesco Poli wrote: [...] > > My own personal opinion is that such additional restriction (which I am > > not even sure can actually be added this way to the GNU LGPL v3) makes > > the result GPL-incompatible. > > The reason is that the GNU GPL insists that the whole work be available > > under the terms of the GNU GPL, but the above restriction makes this > > impossible for the ELPA library. > > Now that you mention it I guess that clause was explicitly included in > the LGPLv3 in order to maintain GPL-compatibility by design, right? It is my understanding that this is indeed the case. > > In that case, I will bring it up with the CP2K maintainers. They do not > distribute binaries though, only a source repository and sometimes > release tarballs. Is this already an issue as they are shipping the > ELPA source in their tree right now? I am not sure that the issue bites even for source-only distribution... Maybe it depends on how the distribution is performed. The relevant questions could perhaps be something like: are CP2K and ELPA distributed as a single whole work? or do CP2K maintainers just distribute ELPA source as a separate library for their users' convenience? Anyway, I'll leave this for other debian-legal regulars to reply. Sure there are people way more knowledgeable than me on this specific matter. [...] Bye and thanks for taking this issue seriously. -- http://www.inventati.org/frx/frx-gpg-key-transition-2010.txt New GnuPG key, see the transition document! ..................................................... Francesco Poli . GnuPG key fpr == CA01 1147 9CD2 EFDF FB82 3925 3E1C 27E1 1F69 BFFE
Attachment:
pgpZC5yPvD3HV.pgp
Description: PGP signature