lgpl usage

An interesting note on the LGPL on common-lisp.net:


What's wrong with LGPL?

Nothing per se, but it probably does not mean what you think it means.
The highly C-centric point of view of the LGPL makes a distinction
between static and dynamic linking, but tells us very little about
certain issues that are of paramount importance for Lisp users:

    * Is loading LGPL code into a non-LGPL image ok? (runtime
dependency)
    * Is it ok to use LGPL macros in non-LGPL code? (compile-time
dependency)
    * Is it ok to redefine operators provided by the LGPL code in
non-LGPL code?
    * Is it ok to distribute an image with LGPL code loaded?

Whether or not these questions are answerable within the bounds of the
LGPL is a matter of debate, but given that the interpretation is not
clear we do not recommend using the LGPL license for Common-lisp.net
projects. If you want to disallow all of the above use GPL, and if you
want to allow some or all of them use LLPGL or MIT/BSD/X11 style
licenses.





-------------------------------------------------------
This SF.net email is sponsored by: IT Product Guide on ITManagersJournal
Use IT products in your business? Tell us what you think of them. Give us
Your Opinions, Get Free ThinkGeek Gift Certificates! Click to find out more
http://productguide.itmanagersjournal.com/guidepromo.tmpl