Re: [eigen] Re: [ #355348] Fwd: LGPLv3 for a C++ Pure Template Library ?

[ Thread Index | Date Index | More Archives ]


Many thanks for your answer. Reading the LGPL3 text I had come to a similar conclusion, but it definitively is useful to have your informed confirmation.

Best regards,

Benoit Jacob

On Thu, 7 Feb 2008, Brett Smith via RT wrote:

I would like to know if the LGPLv3 can be suitable for a C++ pure
template library, where all the code is in headers?


Shane Coughlan from FSF Europe passed your question on to me.  Thanks
for asking about this.

LGPLv3 is perfectly suited for C++ template libraries.  This is mostly
thanks to section 3, which addresses exactly this sort of case.  When
application developers use such header files whose materials are
incorporated directly into the object code, they only need to provide
notice that they're using your library, and include a copy of LGPLv3
with their application.  Thus, there's no longer the technology mismatch
that the libstdc++ licensing FAQ discusses about LGPLv2.1.

I hope this addresses your concerns.  If you have further questions,
please feel free to contact us.

Best regards,

Brett Smith
Licensing Compliance Engineer, Free Software Foundation

Mail converted by MHonArc 2.6.19+