RE: GTK+ Licensing issue: Ch binding (fwd)

[Murray Cumming Comneon com]

So, could someone add this please? I can not do it now because I don't have
real internet access.

Murray Cumming
murrayc usa net
www.murrayc.com 

> -----Original Message-----
> From: wcheng softintegration com [mailto:wcheng softintegration com] 
> Sent: Dienstag, 15. April 2003 20:28
> To: Cumming Murray (COMNEON Linz)
> Cc: james daa com au
> Subject: Re: GTK+ Licensing issue: Ch binding (fwd)
> 
> 
> Hi Murray,
> 
> I just got mail from Owen yesterday regarding the binding issue.
> The mail is attached below.
> 
> Thanks for handling,
> 
> Wayne
> 
> 
> From otaylor redhat com  Mon Apr 14 13:06:04 2003
> Return-Path: <otaylor redhat com>
> Delivered-To: wcheng softintegration com
> Received: from lacrosse.corp.redhat.com 
> (nat-pool-rdu.redhat.com [66.187.233.200])
> 	by mail.softintegration.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 500B5FB16
> 	for <wcheng softintegration com>; Mon, 14 Apr 2003 
> 13:06:04 -0400 (EDT)
> Received: from landau.devel.redhat.com 
> (landau.devel.redhat.com [172.16.56.103])
> 	by lacrosse.corp.redhat.com (8.11.6/8.9.3) with ESMTP 
> id h3EIM6V11083;
> 	Mon, 14 Apr 2003 14:22:06 -0400
> Subject: Re: GTK+ Licensing issue: Ch binding
> From: Owen Taylor <otaylor redhat com>
> To: murrayc usa net
> Cc: "Wayne W. Cheng" <wcheng softintegration com>
> In-Reply-To: <1043283359 24962 8 camel localhost localdomain>
> References: <1043283359 24962 8 camel localhost localdomain>
> Content-Type: text/plain
> Organization: 
> Message-Id: <1050301162 5071 45 camel localhost localdomain>
> Mime-Version: 1.0
> X-Mailer: Ximian Evolution 1.2.2 (1.2.2-0) 
> Date: 14 Apr 2003 02:19:22 -0400
> Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
> 
> On Wed, 2003-01-22 at 19:55, Murray Cumming wrote:
> > Owen, we've been through a conversation with this guy about 
> his bundling
> > of GTK+ binaries with his language binding for it.
> > 
> http://lists.gnome.org/archives/language-bindings/2003-January
/msg00002.html
> and that has led to some improvements/clarifications because he wants to
> do the right thing.
> 
> This is the end result. It seems more or less OK, but I'd like your
> approval of his licensing, because I'm uneasy about the prominent "No
> Modification of Licensed Software" clause, with a less prominent "Those
> open source components are governed by their licenses" clause.

I don't want to give any firm statement that the complete Ch GTK+
binding system is in compliance with the LGPL:

 A) I'm not a lawyer
 B) I'd have to examine the entire distribution to have any opinion

The "common sense" interpretation of the LGPL is that if:

A) the user can modify the GTK+ sources, and rebuild the system to
   use the modified sources
B) source is provided for all modifications to GTK+ and those
   modifications can be redistributed under the LGPL

then things are probably OK. But I don't see any problem with having
the license be done as an exception to a more restrictive license.
>From my opinion, going ahead and adding the link from the language
binding page should be fine.

Regards,
                                            Owen