IANAL, but it seems to me that both LGPL and GPL+classpath do not allow for direct extensions to be distributed under another license. However, combined and independent work (as in work merely using logback) is not affected by the provisions of the LGPL or GPL+classpath. As I understand it, the objections against the LGPL are due to the fuzzy nature of the extend to which the LGPL applies. I hate to admit that even with the classpath exception the meaning of "independent" is not 100% clear. IMHO, the LGPL does not fair any better. Arthur Blake wrote:
I absolutely agree that LGPL or GPL+classpath are valid and reasonable licenses... it just makes it a little less business friendly.
Does the GPL+classpath allow for writing extensions and plugins for logback that I can license as a non-copyleft license (apache /BSD/X11 or closed source)?
-- Ceki Gülcü QOS.ch is looking to hire talented developers in Switzerland. If interested, please contact c e k i @ q o s . c h