[jdom-interest] Imcompatibility with GPL

Elliotte Harold elharo at metalab.unc.edu
Fri Sep 29 14:49:55 PDT 2006

Jason Hunter wrote:

> Thanks for the link.  In *my* opinion, his opinion isn't in any fashion 
> authoritative on the question.  In fact, because he's a lawyer for the 
> FSF he has more bias on the issue than I'd myself want if I was looking 
> for legal advice on the topic.

Read it again. The *only* reason anyone ever thought there was a problem 
is because they misinterpreted something he said in the first place.

> Java's import functionality?  OK, so what if I don't do any imports and 
> use fully qualified class names everywhere?  Or what if I use reflection 
> using Class.forName() to pull in classes and avoid any compile-time 
> checking but still manage to make the calls?

Irrelevant. It's the same story.

> Fact is the LGPL was written with C in mind, and because of that fact 
> it's "squishy" when it comes to Java or any language that does runtime 
> linking.  

It's not in the least bit squishy. There's no problem here. There never 
was. Please stop spreading FUD about this.

Elliotte Rusty Harold  elharo at metalab.unc.edu
Java I/O 2nd Edition Just Published!

More information about the jdom-interest mailing list