Apologies. I have just read that I should have posted my query below to this mailing list. John From: John Dougrez-Lewis [mailto:jlewis lightblue com] Hi Murray, I have a query on the libxml++ license. I’ve been building an application that is based on a stack of Apache/MIT licensed code, including libxml2. Ideally at some point I might wish to consider releasing the source code of my application under an Apache/MIT license. I understand that, subject to certain conditions, it *may* be possible to build against LGPL licensed code without forced to make any subsequent distribution of a release of my source to then have to be licensed under a GNU-based license. The LGPL license conditions appear to relate to avoiding including the distributing the LGPL’ed code within the Apache/MIT code, so that the LGPL’ed code may then have to be distributed separately, and also that there may be a requirement to provide a facility to allow the LGPL’ed code to be replaced and rebuilt independently of the Apache/MIT code. Please could you clarify the conditions under which, if any, that you would permit me to incorporate calls to the libxml++ library from Apache/MIT licensed and distributed source code without violating the license of your code. Many thanks John |