Yeah, unfortunately I think it's debatable whether LGPL is even OK for a closed-source project to use, since IIRC LGPL specifically talks about linking compiled binaries.
I guess there's the argument that transpiled, minified javascript program is a compiled binary? I'd love to know whether these things have been tested in various courts.
LGPL specifically talks about linking compiled binaries.
That's the context where LGPL is used most often, but the license itself is more general than that. In particular 4/d/0 in [1].
AFAIK, LGPL is about replaceability. If you distribute a compiled program (yes, a minified JS program should qualify) then you need to distribute the source of the LGPL part and document a way how the user can replace that LGPL part in your program with their own modified copy.
Comments
Yeah, unfortunately I think it's debatable whether LGPL is even OK for a closed-source project to use, since IIRC LGPL specifically talks about linking compiled binaries.
I guess there's the argument that transpiled, minified javascript program is a compiled binary? I'd love to know whether these things have been tested in various courts.
That's the context where LGPL is used most often, but the license itself is more general than that. In particular 4/d/0 in [1].
AFAIK, LGPL is about replaceability. If you distribute a compiled program (yes, a minified JS program should qualify) then you need to distribute the source of the LGPL part and document a way how the user can replace that LGPL part in your program with their own modified copy.
[1] https://www.gnu.org/licenses/lgpl-3.0.en.html