Asklemmy

49196 readers

603 users here now

A loosely moderated place to ask open-ended questions

Search asklemmy 🔍

If your post meets the following criteria, it's welcome here!

Open-ended question
Not offensive: at this point, we do not have the bandwidth to moderate overtly political discussions. Assume best intent and be excellent to each other.
Not regarding using or support for Lemmy: context, see the list of support communities and tools for finding communities below
Not ad nauseam inducing: please make sure it is a question that would be new to most members
An actual topic of discussion

Looking for support?

Looking for a community?

Lemmyverse: community search
sub.rehab: maps old subreddits to fediverse options, marks official as such
[email protected]: a community for finding communities

~Icon~ ~by~ ~@Double_[email protected]~

founded 6 years ago

MODERATORS

[email protected]

Why did SDL change from LGPL? (www.libsdl.org)

submitted 3 years ago by [email protected] to c/[email protected]

5 comments fedilink hide all child comments

Apparently SDL-org changed the license of SDL from the LGPL (a copyleft license) to zlib (a permissive license).^[Older Releases (Check the license in versions before SDL2 and 1.3.)]

I don't get why SDL-org would make the license change; unless if it's for popularity.

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments

[–] [email protected] 4 points 3 years ago (1 children)

It sounds like it was to allow static linking in commercial software. Previously, you had to ship a directory of dynamically linked libraries solely because of license restrictions.

[–] [email protected] 1 points 3 years ago

Oh.

Why couldn't they just use DLLs? I don't see why it would be needed to statically link SDL.