Simon Josefsson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Frank Küster <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > >> Michael Banck <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: >> >>> On Thu, May 11, 2006 at 04:46:22PM +0200, martin f krafft wrote: >>>> also sprach Kari Pahula <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> [2006.05.11.1535 +0200]: >>>> > * License : GPL v2 or later >>>> >>>> That will make it pretty useless for non-GPL applications. >>> >>> Non-GPL compatible applications, you mean? >> >> Which non-GPL license can I choose for a software that uses this >> library? > > Any license that is compatible with the GPL, such as the revised BSD > license.
But the software is a derivative work of the GPL. Doesn't it need to be licensed under the GPL, too? I thought the question of GPL compatibility is the other way round: the BSD license is GPL-compatible because I can use BSD-licensed code in a GPL project. Regards, Frank -- Frank Küster Single Molecule Spectroscopy, Protein Folding @ Inst. f. Biochemie, Univ. Zürich Debian Developer (teTeX)
