No source code for vs-core?
heipiao233 opened this issue · 3 comments
@heipiao233 software licenses exist to protect licensors, licensors don't serve the license. The only issue that could come up from this would be getting sued by the owner of a GPL-incompatible library, for using it in a GPL project. Which is why the GNU license FAQ has an entire section about using GPL-incompatible libraries in GPL-licensed software (see here).
Since vs_core is owned by the same people as VS2, there aren't any legal issues caused by using a GPL-incompatible library in a GPL-licensed software (Unless VS2 devs decide to sue themselves for violating their own copyright)
Vs-core is ARR, not LGPL, so it doesn’t violate LGPL
No.
LGPL v3:
This version of the GNU Lesser General Public License incorporates the terms and conditions of version 3 of the GNU General Public License, supplemented by the additional permissions listed below.
GPL v3 section 1:
The “Corresponding Source” for a work in object code form means all the source code needed to generate, install, and (for an executable work) run the object code and to modify the work, including scripts to control those activities. However, it does not include the work's System Libraries, or general-purpose tools or generally available free programs which are used unmodified in performing those activities but which are not part of the work. For example, Corresponding Source includes interface definition files associated with source files for the work, and the source code for shared libraries and dynamically linked subprograms that the work is specifically designed to require, such as by intimate data communication or control flow between those subprograms and other parts of the work.
This term is not an exception in LGPL v3.
VS2 needs vs-core to run, and it isn't a "System Library", so "vs-core" is a part of the "Corresponding Source" of VS2. So vs-core must be under a license that compatible with (L)GPL. Including non-free software vs-core in "free" software VS2 violates LGPL.