1 Oct
2002
1 Oct
'02
4:40 p.m.
And that is essentially the only reason, since LGPL implies GPL compatibility.
/ Martin Nilsson (Fake Build Master)
Previous text:
2002-10-01 21:37: Subject: Re: Pike C Module documentation
GPL/LGPL/MPL is a bit odd (why have GPL at all, it's just a more restrictive LGPL but otherwise the same...?) but fine with me.
If nothing else, it saves time debating with people who don't know the difference (or who _think_ they know the difference). If someone asks if they can get it under GPL, we can simply say "yes" and get on with things.
/ Marcus Comstedt (ACROSS) (Hail Ilpalazzo!)