as andy predicted, they are still being highly cagey and will not give a yes/no
answer to me.  grrr.

however, what they told me, was to go part of the way through developer
registration, so i could read the "ios_program_standard_agreement", in which
case i would "find what i need to know".

here's the clause that pertains to FOSS licensing:

"3.3.20    If Your Application includes any FOSS, You agree to comply with all
applicable FOSS licensing terms. You also agree not to use any FOSS in the
development of Your Application in such a way that would cause the non-FOSS
portions of the Apple Software to be subject to any FOSS licensing terms or
obligations."

so, to my simple mind, it appears that LGPL IS allowed in iOS applications, as
long as you make the source available in a way that is LGPL compliant.

the only thing that bothers me, is this section of the iOS agreement:

"7.1    Delivery of Freely Available Licensed Applications via the App Store;
Certificates If Your Application qualifies as a Licensed Application, it is eligible for
delivery to end-users via the App Store by Apple and/or an Apple Subsidiary. If
You would like Apple and/or an Apple Subsidiary to deliver Your Licensed
Application or authorize additional content, functionality or services You make
available in Your Licensed Application through the use of the In App Purchase
API to end-users for free (no charge) via the App Store, then You appoint Apple
and Apple Subsidiaries as Your legal agent pursuant to the terms of Schedule 1,
for Licensed Applications designated by You as free of charge applications.

If Your Application qualifies as a Licensed Application and You intend to charge
end-users a fee of any kind for Your Licensed Application or within Your
Licensed Application through the use of the In App Purchase API, You must enter
into a separate agreement (Schedule 2) with Apple and/or an Apple Subsidiary
before any such commercial distribution of Your Licensed Application may take
place via the App Store or before any such commercial delivery of additional
content, functionality or services for which you charge end-users a fee may be
authorized through the use of the In App Purchase API in Your Licensed
Application."

i'm not sure if those clauses have any effect on using LGPL code?

Anyway, this is the information i have so far, and i thought i should share it. 

It appears to me that if Mr Yadegari and IRCAM are willing to license expr under
the LGPL, then there's a good chance that the 'full' vanilla distribution would
be allowed in iOS applications. 

it's very hard for me to continue looking into this matter, because there are
some fairly significant moral issues and despite my laughing at people a little
bit, i actually do think these things through, and it's a bit of a difficult
situation.

if people are following this issue, and just not saying anything, then it would
help to get a clearer consensus of the 'community view' here, as i feel very
uncomfortable about pushing this issue if i am going against the general
consensus. 

to outline so far, there seem to be 3 main options:

1) leave expr as GPL 2) take up Mr Yadegari's offer to re-license under the LGPL 3) raise some money or incentive for Mr Yadegari to re-write expr code to be BSD
compliant

On Fri, Nov 4, 2011 at 8:50 AM, Olivier B <lamo...@gmail.com> wrote:

2011/11/2 Jonathan Wilkes <janc...@yahoo.com>