On Wed, 2008-07-09 at 19:11 -0700, David Lutterkort wrote: > On Wed, 2008-07-09 at 17:18 -0700, Jeff Schroeder wrote: > > On Wed, Jul 9, 2008 at 2:59 PM, David Lutterkort <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > I am thinking about relicensing Augeas under the LGPLv3, one of the > > > reasons being that I want to use at least one gnulib module > > > (canonicalize_file_name) that is only available under the LGPLv3. > > > > > > As far as I understand the matter, there should be little impact on the > > > users of Augeas, in particular what can be linked against libaugeas, but > > > IANAL, and I'd like to hear from others before I take that step. > > > > Can you get away with 2.1+ instead of 3? > > No, the gnulib module I am interested in (and a bunch of others) are > under LGPLv3, so I couldn't use it in LGPLv2.1+ code.
canonicalize_file_name has been around a long time, certainly longer than the LGPLv3 ... so you should be able to get copies of that (and probably all the other modules) under LGPLv2+. > What is your concern with LGPLv3 ? (That's mostly why I started the > thread, to find out what concerns it raises) AIUI LGPLv3 can be linked with anything, so I don't think there is a real problem with augeas moving to it ... but I'm _far_ from a lawyer. And far from a marketing person. Also on a personal note it seems really scummy for gnulib to force everyone else to drop the v2.1+ compatibility. -- James Antill <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Fedora _______________________________________________ augeas-devel mailing list [email protected] https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/augeas-devel
