[Lazarus] A few hacky patches (resent)

Hans-Peter Diettrich DrDiettrich1 at aol.com
Fri May 22 21:52:38 CEST 2009

Alexander Klenin schrieb:

>> I see no problem with licensing e.g. the Find dialog under GPL when used in
>> building the IDE, and under LGPL when used in other applications as part of
>> the LCL.
> Sure, but who has the right to make this decision?

We also could ask, who has the right to refuse such a decision.

In the first place it's the author of some file, who can act however he 
likes. For a work with multiple contributors, all contributors must 
agree about a decision - in theory. In practice a common project will 
restrict the decisions of the contributors, so that no single 
contributor can block further development by a veto.

For source files dedicated to the Lazarus project, or to some project 
with multiple contributors in general, I'd assume an consent of all 
contributors, that the project management stuff is entitled to license 
all contributions to that project, in the spirit of the project ("fair 

When the spirit of the choosen license models (GPL/LGPL) shall guarantee 
the free use and further development of the project, that freedom also 
should apply to decisions that are not against this spirit. IOW: no 
single contributor should be allowed to deny his consent to a decision 
of the community of contributors, unless his rights on his contribution 
are affected in an intolerable way ("unfair" use).

[German law specifies both a "community of authors" (§ 8 UrhG: 
Miturheber), which contribute to a common work, and a "combined work" (§ 
9 UrhG: Urheber verbundener Werke). In both cases the authors act as a 
community, and no author can deny his consent to the decisions of the 
community of authors (unless exacting demand, something like "fair 
use"). cum grano salis, IANAL]

> And generally, GPL requires derived works to be GPL also.

A work, derived from the Lazarus IDE, has to be licensed under the terms 
of the Lazarus IDE. When the IDE license is GPL, the derived work also 
must be licensed under GPL.

> Usually, IDE depends on LCL and not vice versa, so this is not a problem.
> But if enough code migrated from IDE to LCL,
> that would IMHO make the latter derived work...

IMO not. Derived work is a different work, based on parts of some other 
work. The Lazarus project depends on FPC, but not on itself. The Lazarus 
IDE and LCL will stay Lazarus IDE and LCL, not affected by decisions 
about what particular files shall be considered as exclusive parts of 
the IDE or of the LCL. Such an "exclusive" assignment to a Lazarus 
sub-project may be subject to later changes, at the discretion of the 
community of authors.

Moving files from an IDE directory into a LCL directory will affect the 
users, which then are allowed to use the files according to the LCL 
license (LGPL), as stated in COPYING.txt. Only the authors are allowed 
to move files in this way, with such consequences, and only when the 
spirit of the project is obeyed (fair use).


More information about the Lazarus mailing list