🚀 go-pugleaf

Dear Folks,

I would expect that any free objects that would come from the
Free Software Foundation would fall under the GNU *LIBRARY* GENERAL
PUBLIC LICENSE.  The FSF recognizes the difference between libraries and
utilities and has a separate license for this very purpose.  Look in
the glibc or libg++ source to find out exactly what the GLGPL specifically
says (it's too long for me to post here), but my interpretation (we don't
use any GNU libraries in any of our products, hence I've never had our
counsel look at the GLGPL) is that you can use anything that's covered by
the GLGPL in a couple of ways:

	1)  You can distribute your stuff and allow the end-user to link
in the appropriate GLGPL covered libararies.

	2) You can link them in yourself (the average customer doesn't want
to be bothered with this stuff), provided you provide some mechanism where
the recipient can re-link modified versions of the GLGPL covered libraries.
Possibilities include supplying both a linked and an unlinked version or
just the former, as long as you will provide the latter when asked.

There are also rules concerning letting people know the terms mentioned
above, but I believe I've imparted the gist of the section of the GLGPL
that applies to stuff linked in with GLGPL created libraries.

As I've stated before, I'm a big fan of the FSF.  Their software is not
only a major win to use, there's a lot to be learned by reading their
source.  If you're not familiar with the FSF, I highly urge you to check
them, their software and their policies out.  FSF Objects?  A win in my book.

		--Cliff[ord T. Matthews]
		ctm@ardi.com

[bias alert:  a former ARDI employee is hard at work writing the GNU HURD].