On 31/08/14 17:54, Johannes Schauer wrote: > As it is pointed out here [5] and here [6], GPL2 is incompatible with Apache2 > but GPL3 projects can contain Apache2 licensed code. Since vcmi is licensed > GPL2+, could the Debian package upgrade the license to GPL3+ and thus turn it > into a GPL3 project with Apache2 code which should be compatible? Sorry if > this > is stupid, it's just a naive idea.
(All answers are on the basis of your statements about the license being accurate: I know nothing about vcmi.) That general reasoning works, but you don't have to "upgrade" the license or anything. The way to think about it is: who has the right to say what you may do, and what did they say? The copyright holder of fuzzylite (more precisely, the fuzzylite source code) says you may copy it, as long as you don't do anything not allowed by the Apache license v2. The copyright holder of vcmi (more precisely, the parts of the vcmi source code other than fuzzylite) says you may copy it, as long as you don't do anything not allowed by any of the GPL2, or the GPL3, or a hypothetical future GPL version. OK, that's the source. What about the binaries? They are a derivative work of both vcmi and fuzzylite source code, so you may only do things that are allowed by both the vcmi copyright holders, and the fuzzylite copyright holders. In other words, the license is "you must obey the GPL2 or later, and simultaneously obey the Apache license v2". The GPL2 says you can only copy under GPL2 if the source code for the whole thing is under terms no more restrictive than GPL2, and the Apache license v2 has terms more restrictive than that, so, no go: this combination of licenses would place impossible requirements on you. However, the GPL3 says you can only copy under GPL3 if the source code for the whole thing is under terms no more restrictive than (GPL3 + a few restrictions), and the Apache license v2 fits in those few restrictions, so it is possible to comply with the terms of both the GPL3 and the Apache license v2 simultaneously. Both of these licenses let you do everything the DFSG requires, so that's good enough for Debian. The license applicable to the binaries is still not GPL-3, though - it is ((GPL-2 or GPL-3 or ...) and Apache-2.0). The practical result is the same as ((GPL-3 or ...) and Apache-2.0), but it matters if you're going to extract GPL-2+ bits and combine them with something GPL-2. S -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-legal-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: https://lists.debian.org/54039338.7090...@debian.org