[kplato] Moving Forward

[Chris Howells]

> From: Chris Clarke <security@cfourconsulting.com>

> I'll agree with the LGPL.  As for the difference (I saw a question about
that 
> somewhere), my understanding is that basically it's the same as the GPL 
> except the LGPL gives permission for DLL's under non GPL compatible
licences 
> to link against it, which is why it would enourage add-on development.

Pretty much.

For example, take glibc, the standard GNU C library, which is used by
programs that are written in C (and possible C++ as well, but I'm not 100%
sure -- but that's besides the point).

Since programs compiled on Linux will have glibc code linked in to it, you
would not be able to distributed pre-compiled closed source propreitary
software, since it would have GPL'd (e.g. glibc) code linked in.

Therefore, the FSF used the LGPL (Lesser GNU General Public License), which
allows it to be linked into propreitary, closed source, software.

Hope that clarifies it a little! :)

> C++ was my choice so I'll quickly agree with that.

And me, considering I'm learning C++ at the moment (and will go onto Qt
after that) :)

Chris Howells