[kde-community] Licensing question with header-only libraries

[Olivier Goffart]

On Sonntag, 24. Januar 2016 10:15:37 CET Ivan Čukić wrote:
> > I'd go with LGPL+exception. It's effectively the same as GPL+exception in
> > this context but shows the intent of providing a library. If someone ever
> 
> I have never seen a project under LGPL+exception, that is the reason I
> wrote GPL+exception. For me, it is the same, but I agree it would be
> more obvious to the client if 'L' was added.
> 
> Now, the main problem here is that (L)GPL+exception is not on the list
> of approved licenses for our code. :


Eigen is a header-only library that used to be LGPL.
I recommand you have a look at their Licensing FAQ from the time:

http://eigen.tuxfamily.org/index.php?title=Licensing_FAQ&oldid=1116