From: Simon Josefsson <simon@josefsson.org>
To: ofono@ofono.org
Subject: Re: License question: Why GPLv2 only?
Date: Tue, 12 May 2009 09:21:16 +0200 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <87bppyais3.fsf@mocca.josefsson.org> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <1242111485.2970.27.camel@localhost.localdomain>
[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 2091 bytes --]
Marcel Holtmann <holtmann@linux.intel.com> writes:
> Hi Simon,
>
>> Interesting project. I read some of the source code you have published,
>> and some files are licensed under the GPLv2 or later:
>>
>> http://git.kernel.org/?p=network/ofono/ofono.git;a=blob;f=gdbus/mainloop.c;hb=HEAD
>>
>> However, many files are licensed under the GPLv2 only, with no option of
>> using later license versions, for example:
>>
>> http://git.kernel.org/?p=network/ofono/ofono.git;a=blob;f=gatchat/gatchat.c;hb=HEAD
>> http://git.kernel.org/?p=network/ofono/ofono.git;a=blob;f=src/dbus-gsm.c;hb=HEAD
>>
>> Has it been a conscious decision to use GPLv2-only for some files?
>
> these are on purpose this way. The files gdbus/*.[ch] contain the
> original license and copyright from the BlueZ project, because they are
> copied from there.
>
> All the rest of the oFono source code is GPLv2 only.
Ah, thanks for explaining. Maybe these details could be recorded in
documentation somewhere. When/if will be packaged for a GNU/Linux
distribution, it will become relevant.
>> Are you aware that using GPLv2-only makes your work license incompatible
>> with (L)GPLv3 work? If I understand correctly, you cannot combine any
>> of your GPLv2-only work with code licensed under the LGPLv3 or GPLv3.
>> The GPLv2-only license is not compatible with the (L)GPLv3 license, see:
>>
>> http://www.gnu.org/licenses/gpl-faq.html#AllCompatibility
>>
>> I would humbly request that you use GPLv2-or-later for code instead, to
>> allow you, and everyone else, to combine your work with (L)GPLv3 code.
>
> That is not really up to me and there are concerns with the GPLv3
> license that hasn't been addressed properly at this moment. I am not a
> lawyer and I am bound by company policy in this regard.
Sure, I understand.
> Even if we would switch to GPLv3 license, then we can not be linked with
> GPLv2 or LGPLv2 only code.
Btw, using the LGPLv2+ would allow for combining with any *GPLv*
license. Of course, that wouldn't work for the BlueZ code.
/Simon
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2009-05-12 7:21 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 4+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2009-05-12 6:50 License question: Why GPLv2 only? Simon Josefsson
2009-05-12 6:58 ` Marcel Holtmann
2009-05-12 7:21 ` Simon Josefsson [this message]
2009-05-12 7:29 ` Marcel Holtmann
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=87bppyais3.fsf@mocca.josefsson.org \
--to=simon@josefsson.org \
--cc=ofono@ofono.org \
/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 a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox