On Thu, Nov 24, 2016 at 07:29:21PM +0100, Roberto wrote:
> On Thu, Nov 24, 2016 at 06:36:53PM +0100, Pali Rohár wrote:
> > I'm not saying that it invalidates. Just that I understood that whole
> > igmpproxy can be redistributed under GPLv2+ and some other parts, based
> > on mrouted had original
> I do not know, but mrouted was relicensed to BSD in 2003 and igmpproxy
> started in 2005 (according to year in source files). And because BSD is
> compatible with GPL, you can relicense those parts to GPL and adds your
> own GPL code to it. Then whole package can be redistributed only under
On Thu, Nov 24, 2016 at 06:36:53PM +0100, Pali Rohár wrote:
> I'm not saying that it invalidates. Just that I understood that whole
> igmpproxy can be redistributed under GPLv2+ and some other parts, based
> on mrouted had original license Stanford.txt... and those and only those
> parts
On Thursday 24 November 2016 18:21:07 Roberto wrote:
> On Thu, Nov 24, 2016 at 05:36:57PM +0100, Pali Rohár wrote:
> > On Tuesday 22 November 2016 16:17:21 Roberto wrote:
> > > On Tue, Nov 22, 2016 at 02:42:34PM +0100, Pali Rohár wrote:
> > > The COPYING file that you linked says "Original license
On Thu, Nov 24, 2016 at 05:36:57PM +0100, Pali Rohár wrote:
> On Tuesday 22 November 2016 16:17:21 Roberto wrote:
> > On Tue, Nov 22, 2016 at 02:42:34PM +0100, Pali Rohár wrote:
> > The COPYING file that you linked says "Original license can be found
> > in the Stanford.txt file". It says nothing
On Tuesday 22 November 2016 16:17:21 Roberto wrote:
> On Tue, Nov 22, 2016 at 02:42:34PM +0100, Pali Rohár wrote:
> [...]
>
> > Note that smcroute 0.92 was accepted into Debian [4].
> >
> > Due to above GPL facts in igmpproxy files I think that everybody
> > though igmpproxy is licensed and
6 matches
Mail list logo
