LGPL vs. GPL + Classpath Exception

[Wilson, Andrew]

Mark Wielaard wrote:

> Sure. I wouldn't read too much into the whole thing. It is more an
> historic curiosity. 

Yes, history has left FSF with a patchwork of licensing for
their libraries: LGPL, GPL+runtime, and GPL+classpath.  I have not
yet seen the "final call" LGPLv3 draft, but FSF still may not be able to
get to a unified licensing scheme for their libraries going forward.  
There is expanded verbiage in the previous LGPLv3 draft to address OO
languages, leading one to infer that FSF may intend to 
subsume the GPL+classpath usage model into LGPLv3. However,
GPL+classpath or GPL+runtime 
are in some ways more permissive than LGPL (e.g., no requirement for 
allowing reverse engineering), and there may be maintainers and 
contributors who balk at relicensing from these historic exceptions to
LGPL.

Andy Wilson
Intel Open Source Technology Center