Re: ANN: Update to AdaGPGME and libgpg-error

[Marin David Condic <nobody@noplace.com>]

I think the LGPL does not adequately cover generics. For a long time, 
Ada has been rather unique in having generics and so licenses aimed at 
things like C never really thought to cover them. Clearly, other 
languages are catching up, so the GMGPL may be more useful.

A generic is not really a callable subroutine. Its sort of vaguely 
similar to a macro expansion, but not quite the same thing. So if the 
LGPL says you can call a subroutine and that doesn't make your code 
GPL'ed, does that mean that instantiating a generic doesn't GPL your 
code? If its ambiguous at all, you're better off having a license that 
explicitly spells it out.

MDC

Andreas Almroth wrote:
> 
> Well, I'm not an legal eagle, but I don't see that GMGPL in any way is 
> limiting/infringing LGPL.
> 

-- 
======================================================================
Marin David Condic
I work for: http://www.belcan.com/
My project is: http://www.jsf.mil/NSFrames.htm

Send Replies To: m   o   d   c @ a   m   o   g
                    c   n   i       c   .   r

     "'Shut up,' he explained."

         --  Ring Lardner
======================================================================