There are few by error.
The important cases are lineup-parameters used for uncrustify, and the
threatics part from gnome-builder.
However, we already spent time on implementing our own thing in the past with
git-archive-all (GPLv3+) when meson couldn't handle it, so I would like to
prevent this from happening again and avoid us the work with asking few
upstreams to relicense based on our needs, and rather switch to GPL3+ where
most of the tools are.
Best regards,
Carlos Soriano
-------- Original Message --------
Subject: Re: Relicensing Nautilus to GPLv3+
Local Time: May 17, 2017 4:59 PM
UTC Time: May 17, 2017 2:59 PM
From: had...@hadess.net
To: Michael Catanzaro <mike.catanz...@gmail.com>
Ernestas Kulik <ernest...@gnome.org>, nautilus-l...@gnome.org,
desktop-devel-list@gnome.org, release-t...@gnome.org
On Wed, 2017-05-17 at 09:45 -0500, Michael Catanzaro wrote:
> On Wed, May 17, 2017 at 9:20 AM, Bastien Nocera <had...@hadess.net>
> wrote:
> > If nautilus is GPLv3+, that means we can't link it against GPLv2-
> > only
> > or LGPLv2-only libraries in the extensions. I'm also not opening
> > the
> > can of worms that is non-GPL-compatible dependencies of extensions
> > (such as proprietary, or patent-encumbered GStreamer plugins),
> > because
> > that's an existing problem.
> >
> > What's the end goal for relicensing? What problems do the current
> > license cause that require a relicense?
> >
> > Cheers
>
> Sounds like the license is already GPLv3+, since it uses GPLv3+
> source
> files, and the existing GPLv2+ notices are incorrect or misleading.
Were those licenses applied in error, or imported from projects that
were GPLv3 themselves?
--
nautilus-list mailing list
nautilus-l...@gnome.org
https://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/nautilus-list
_______________________________________________
desktop-devel-list mailing list
desktop-devel-list@gnome.org
https://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/desktop-devel-list
