On 14/09/2012 19:55, Vishnu VV wrote:
>
> The concern is with LGPL v3 in a closed appliance in the consumer space;
> and that we would have to allow others to patch the product with an
> updated version of the library. We have no issue releasing any
> improvements made to the driver back to the community, the concern is if
> we would end up exposing other commercial code that would be required to
> patch the driver in our product.
>
> We have no problem with LGPL v2 or a commercial license that required us
> to release back changes we make to the driver itself. Is that a
> possibility?
psycopg2 is a Python _module_ so you'll never end up linking it
statically with your application. The requirements of the LGPL3 are
_already_ taken care of by simply distributing psycopg2 as a module
together with your application. If you don't change psycopg2 code you
don't have any other burden and nothing in the LGPL3 says you should
expose your code in this case.
federico
--
Federico Di Gregorio federico.digregorio@dndg.it
Studio Associato Di Nunzio e Di Gregorio http://dndg.it
When people say things are a lot more complicated than that, they
means they're getting worried that they won't like the truth.
-- Granny Weatherwax