Re: [Bug-gnulib] xalloc module dependencies

[Karl Berry]

    Would there be any interest in my submitting the LGPL versions of
    the portability functions libltdl uses for inclusion in gnulib
    alongside their GPL namesakes?

A number of original sources are LGPL, such as from libc.  We convert
them to GPL for use in gnulib (the config/srclist-update script has an
option for this).

    The toplevel README implies 

The toplevel README needs updating.

    If we merge the improvements of, say, GPL memset.c into my LGPL
    memset.c, can we throw away the GPL file and distribute the merge
    under the LGPL?

In my opinion: yes.

    silly thing is that many of these functions comprise just a handful
    of lines of code each!

rms once said his legal threshold for getting papers signed for
contributions is 15 lines (or so).  So for functions smaller than that
(like these), I really can't see any issue with arbitrarily making them
LGPL, if that is better for you.

Although I remember that we (mainly Paul) discussed the whole LGPL->GPL
thing in the past, I can't remember if we reached a conclusion about
then back-transforming GPL->LGPL (I know it's not strictly allowed, but
when we're copying an original source is LGPL ...).