23 Mar
2009
23 Mar
'09
10:18 a.m.
On Mon, 23 Mar 2009 10:53:19 +0100, Sebastian Redl <sebastian.redl@getdesigned.at> wrote:
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.)
We'd also enjoy having a license as flexible as possible. I don't want to waste time brainstorming all the customer's use cases and spending lawyer fees to validate the license compatibility. Restrictions incur costs. -- EA http://www.bureau14.fr/