> I'm not exactly sure what you mean here. There is no problem in statically
> linking BSD with LGPL code as long as you redistribute the entire source
> (BSD + LGPL parts) with your binary, right? So then it would not be the
> linking or the license combination that's the problem, it becomes only
On 2011-02-21 02:37, Matt Giuca wrote:
That's a good summary. I would just add one thing:
Can I include FluidSynth in my closed-source commercial project
I would add to this section "The same advice applies to projects
released under permissive licenses (e.g., BSD or MIT). Because such
license
That's a good summary. I would just add one thing:
> Can I include FluidSynth in my closed-source commercial project
I would add to this section "The same advice applies to projects
released under permissive licenses (e.g., BSD or MIT). Because such
licenses permit closed-source redistribution, th
There are a few licensing related questions which seem to come up once
in a while and it's sometimes difficult to remember what we have said
about them, so I wrote up a little wiki page about them:
https://sourceforge.net/apps/trac/fluidsynth/wiki/LicensingFAQ
Anything wrong/forgotten?
// Dav
