On 2005-11-04 01:08:11 -0500, J.C. Roberts <unknown(NO_SPAM)@abac.com> said:
> Unfortunately, in spite of all the good intentions, it seems both you
> and Franz have failed to grasp an important fact about licensing; the
> supposed "preamble" actually means nothing legally since it is not
> actually part of the license.
You are mistaken about what "the license" is. The license here is the
LLGPL, not the LGPL. The LLGPL consists of the preamble *and* the LGPL.
Not only is the preamble "part of the license," it is the *controlling*
part. It is perfectly acceptable legal practice to combine two
documents as long as you make clear which clause(s) take(s) precedence
in the case of conflict, which is precisely what the LLGPL does:
"Wherever there is a conflict between this document and the LGPL, this
document takes precedence over the LGPL."
regards