From: Cornelia Huck <cohuck@redhat.com>
To: Thomas Huth <thuth@redhat.com>
Cc: qemu-devel@nongnu.org, qemu-s390x@nongnu.org,
Riku Voipio <riku.voipio@iki.fi>,
Laurent Vivier <laurent@vivier.eu>,
Christian Borntraeger <borntraeger@de.ibm.com>
Subject: Re: [Qemu-devel] [PATCH] s390x: Fix the confusing contributions-after-2012 license statements
Date: Wed, 6 Feb 2019 14:15:38 +0100 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20190206141538.65852cec.cohuck@redhat.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <124f9832-6006-06a9-f5fc-41526e37efca@redhat.com>
On Wed, 6 Feb 2019 14:09:40 +0100
Thomas Huth <thuth@redhat.com> wrote:
> On 2019-02-06 13:58, Cornelia Huck wrote:
> > On Wed, 6 Feb 2019 13:41:33 +0100
> > Thomas Huth <thuth@redhat.com> wrote:
> >
> >> The license information in these files is rather confusing. The text
> >> declares LGPL first, but then says that contributions after 2012 are
> >> licensed under the GPL instead. How should the average user who just
> >> downloaded the release tarball know which part is now GPL and which
> >> is LGPL?
> >
> > FWIW, that statement was added in ccb084d3f0ec ("s390: new
> > contributions GPLv2 or later").
> >
> >>
> >> Looking at the text of the LGPL (see COPYING.LIB in the top directory),
> >> the license clearly states how this should be done instead:
> >>
> >> "3. You may opt to apply the terms of the ordinary GNU General Public
> >> License instead of this License to a given copy of the Library. To do
> >> this, you must alter all the notices that refer to this License, so
> >> that they refer to the ordinary GNU General Public License, version 2,
> >> instead of to this License."
> >
> > Hm. This talks about GPL v2, not GPL v2-or-later...
>
> IANAL, but since all the files originally were licensed under
> LGPLv2-or-later, that should not be an issue, as far as I can see: You
> then could also upgrade the LGPLv2-or-later code to LGPLv3-or-later,
> which in turn allows you to license under GPLv3. So LGPLv2-or-later
> means you can put the code also under GPLv2-or-later. Or do I miss
> something?
That would seem logical, but IANAL, either...
Anyway, I'd be happy to queue this if I get acks :)
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2019-02-06 13:15 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 12+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2019-02-06 12:41 [Qemu-devel] [PATCH] s390x: Fix the confusing contributions-after-2012 license statements Thomas Huth
2019-02-06 12:58 ` Cornelia Huck
2019-02-06 13:02 ` Laurent Vivier
2019-02-11 15:24 ` Alexander Graf
2019-02-11 15:31 ` Cornelia Huck
2019-02-11 16:00 ` Alexander Graf
2019-02-11 16:05 ` Cornelia Huck
2019-02-06 13:09 ` Thomas Huth
2019-02-06 13:15 ` Cornelia Huck [this message]
2019-02-06 13:17 ` Laurent Vivier
2019-02-06 14:28 ` [Qemu-devel] [qemu-s390x] " Christian Borntraeger
2019-02-11 10:43 ` [Qemu-devel] " Cornelia Huck
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=20190206141538.65852cec.cohuck@redhat.com \
--to=cohuck@redhat.com \
--cc=borntraeger@de.ibm.com \
--cc=laurent@vivier.eu \
--cc=qemu-devel@nongnu.org \
--cc=qemu-s390x@nongnu.org \
--cc=riku.voipio@iki.fi \
--cc=thuth@redhat.com \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is an external index of several public inboxes,
see mirroring instructions on how to clone and mirror
all data and code used by this external index.