Hello Ralph, The different license emphasizes the fact that logback is a different project than log4j. At this stage, developers who wish to contribute to logback can and do contribute. In other words, although the Apache license could potentially facilitate the adoption of logback, the project is doing fine as it is. It may be that I am in denial and that LGPL is hurting the project. When and if that becomes apparent, the license may be changed. In practice, LGPL is preventing the adoption of logback by one major actor, namely the ASF. Now, since Java 7 is licensed under GPL, I think the position of the foundation, that is rejecting (L)GPL wholesale, is simply untenable. I might be misreading the situation. By the way, there should be a FAQ entry for this question. Ralph Goers wrote:
You shouldn't. That is why I'm wondering why the LPGL instead of the Apache license.
-- Ceki Gülcü