undefined | Better HN

0 pointsadev_6y ago0 comments

> With the reference encoder licensed under LGPLv3, I doubt any browser team will be able to incorporate this work into their product.

I'm gonna make enemies....

That's FUD and BSD bullshit.

LGPL is not GPL. You can link what the fuck you want to a LGPL library included your proprietary code as long as you link dynamically.

Gtk+ uses LGPL, GLib, uses LGPL, GNOME use LGPL, Qt uses LGPL, Cairo uses LGPL and millions of applications link into these ones without problems.

I'm not aware of any case in history where a company got attacked, or frightened to use a LGPL library in their codebase.

It would be good to stop the FUD excepted if you need to feed your lawyer.

0 comments

LGPL is incompatible with signed executables, which locks it out of anything distributed through an app store, which is a lot of software these days.

adev_OP6y ago

> LGPL is incompatible with signed executables

Do you have a source for that ?

HN seems to have discussed this back in 2012: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=4789784

Do signed executables fail to load unsigned DLLs?

j / k navigate · click thread line to collapse