Re: proposed FAQ entries about licensing

[John W. Eaton]

On  8-Apr-2009, Judd Storrs wrote:

| The table doesn't mention LGPLv2 at all, only "LGPLv2.1".

I don't think this matters for the purpose of what can you link with
code distributed under the terms of the LGPL.  The intent of the LGPL
was to allow linking with anything.  So it would seem really odd to me
if somehow software released under the terms of the LGPL (any version)
could be linked with software that is covered by a proprietary
software license, but not linked with software distributed under the
terms of the GPL...  But if you think that is the case, then it would
help if you could cite the clauses of the licenses which prevent that
kind of linking, and explain why that is so.

jwe