On Sun, 22 Mar 2009 23:22:10 -0700 (PDT), Walter Landry <wlandry@caltech.edu> wrote:
Fernando Cacciola <fernando.cacciola@gmail.com> wrote:
The potential problem Paul is asking us to consider is not the boost library but the dependent non-boost library, such as GMP in the case of GTL.
AFAICT, in the case of LPGPled libs such as GMP and MPFR, there is no problem in using them in commercial products, even closed source applications (provided a copy of the license is distributed with said product), so I don't think there should be any restriction on allowing Boost libs to depend on LPGL libs.
The LGPL requires you to construct your code in such a way that you can relink with a new library. It also requires you to allow users to reverse engineer the code for debugging. Commercial users of Boost may not like those terms.
My company, for example, would be interested in the BGL, but quite unable to include an LGPL library, since our copy protection mechanism kills the application if it detects a debugger. This would be a license violation. (We probably wouldn't need bignum functionality. As long as the BGL can be used without the bignum libraries, we'd probably be happy.) Sebastian