Hacker Newsnew | past | comments | ask | show | jobs | submitlogin

Strange claim, actually. Considering that it's under LGPL, so the legal team must and want to know about it.



But they don't claim that your legal team should not be bothered? I mean, that's the strange part, not the license itself


Deal breaker for us, since alternatives exist that aren't so hobbled.


I get legal having issues with GPL but LGPL???


It's still possible to violate the license. I guess a "fat jar" distribution could be a trouble.


Thats what the classpath exception is for, no?


While it's ok to violate the terms of software under other licenses?




Guidelines | FAQ | Lists | API | Security | Legal | Apply to YC | Contact

Search: