Re: vm/reference classes licensed under LGPL

[Artur Biesiadowski]

Mark Wielaard wrote:

> The classes in vm/reference all seem to be licensed under the LGPL.
> Is this right? This would mean that I cannot share these implementations
> with e.g. libgcj since they don't accept LGPLed code :(

If we are on the subject of licenses. Can anybody explain me a
difference between GPL with special clause allowing linking versus plain
LGPL ?

For me GPL is nice license, but only for standalone static programs. In
today world, where everything is dynamic (and especially entire java) it
is too strict to be useful. LGPL looks best for me. Why gcc people have
choosen modified GPL instead of LGPL ? Just because RMS says GPL is
good, LGPL is bad ? You know, as well they could make
"This code is licensed under GPL v2, with sole exception that license
does not hold".
Also 'modified GPL', isn't it ? :)

Artur