LGPL instead of GPL?

[sonertari]

Thank you for your Aho-Corasick library. It was exactly what I was looking for. So, after a few modifications to suppress ISO C and c99 warnings, I was able to use it in my project successfully. Your project is really good, and deserves a better praise than just a single star on Github.

My SSLproxy project is released under a 2-clause BSD license, and I cannot change it. Please also see its develop branch which uses your library in filtering rules, to be released soon.

But your Aho-Corasick library is released under the GPL-3.0. As it is a library, would you consider releasing it under the LGPL instead? Afaik, the LGPL is more suitable for libraries. That would make your library available to many other open source projects, like my SSLproxy.

Note: Some legal experts think that static or dynamic linking does not violate the GPL, because what matters is the intention to use as a library, not the linkage technique, so the software linking a library cannot be considered a derivative work of that library. But, the LGPL resolves such disputes.