Re: License for small Ada.* complements

[Thomas <fantome.forums.tDeContes@free.fr.invalid>]

In article <86h7361dpf.fsf@stephe-leake.org>,
 Stephen Leake <stephen_leake@stephe-leake.org> wrote:

> Thomas <fantome.forums.tDeContes@free.fr.invalid> writes:
> 
> > In article <86mtcyu1c6.fsf@stephe-leake.org>,
> >  Stephen Leake <stephen_leake@stephe-leake.org> wrote:
> >
> >> Thomas <fantome.forums.tDeContes@free.fr.invalid> writes:
> >> 
> >> > In article <86sfmsi7ir.fsf@stephe-leake.org>,
> >> >  Stephen Leake <stephen_leake@stephe-leake.org> wrote:
> >> >
> >> >> Thomas <fantome.forums.tDeContes@free.fr.invalid> writes:
> >> >> 
> >> >> > i would like your opinion please, about which license i should use 
> >> >> > for a 
> >> >> > part of my libraries.
> >> >> 
> >> >> Always use the GPL unless you have a specific reason not to; ie, a
> >> >> customer asks/pays for a different license.
> >> >

> >> > do you use GPL rather than LGPL on libraries ??
> >> 
> >> Yes; GPL 3 has a better way of handling libraries.
> >
> > could you precise me please?

what is this "better way" compared to GPL 2?

> >
> > does it allow to use it in any proprietary program, as required for this 
> > kind of generic libraries?
> 
> You did not mention this requirement before.

i told "small Ada.* complements".
they could be usefull for anyone.

> 
> > do you use "pragma License Modified_GPL" or "pragma License GPL" on 
> > libraries?
> 
> Modified_GPL allows use in proprietary programs; GPL does not.

ok.
afaiu, i should use "pragma License" in this way, even if i choose an 
other License than any GPL variant.

-- 
RAPID maintainer
http://savannah.nongnu.org/projects/rapid/