On 11/11/2016 07:44 PM, Bruno Haible wrote: > Hi, > > It has been decided that libunistring is going to be relicensed under > "dual LGPLv3+ or GPLv2" license. See > http://lists.gnu.org/archive/html/bug-libunistring/2016-11/msg00003.html > > To this effect, the libunistring modules in gnulib that are currently under > LGPLv3+ need to be relicensed to 'LGPLv3+ or GPLv2'. Those modules that > are under LGPLv2+ stay under LGPLv2+. > > 1) > This proposed patch does this. It also extends gnulib-tool so that > * the option --lgpl accepts the form --lgpl=3orGPLv2 > * the compatibility checks consider this 'LGPLv3+ or GPLv2' license > (namely, the allowed relicensings are: > LGPLv2+ --> 'LGPLv3+ or GPLv2'
LGPL can always be tightened to GPL, and the + means it can be upgraded from 2 to 3, so this is correct. > 'LGPLv3+ or GPLv2' --> LGPLv3+ = LGPL This says you are picking only one of the two options, so it is correct. > 'LGPLv3+ or GPLv2' --> GPLv2+ This one is possible because LGPLv3+ can always be tightened to GPLv3+; it is written GPLv2+ because of the GPLv2 option. > 'LGPLv3+ or GPLv2' --> GPLv3+ = GPL And this says you are picking only the LGPLv3+ option, then tightening it to GPLv3+. Okay, I agree with all four of those transitions. > > === Paul, Eric, Ludovic, === > > Would you agree to relicense your changes to lib/isnan.c > under 'LGPLv3+ or GPLv2'? > Or possibly even under LGPLv2+? I'd lean towards the more-permissive LGPLv2+, but 'LGPLv3+ or GPLv2' is also fine. -- Eric Blake eblake redhat com +1-919-301-3266 Libvirt virtualization library http://libvirt.org
signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature