Thank you, I will leave the 'or later version' provisions intact.
I've reviewed every patch since 2005. Based on gnu.org's guidelines (
http://www.gnu.org/prep/maintain/html_node/Legally-Significant.html), there
are few contributions that I intend to single out for special treatment.
After eliminating patches to the main programs, encfs.cpp and encfsctl.cpp
(where the license is not changing), then only one or two patches remain.
I will follow up directly with those authors.
Of course, if I don't contact you it doesn't mean that your patches weren't
appreciated.
regards,
Valient
On Mon, Aug 27, 2012 at 8:14 AM, Werner Koch <w...@gnupg.org> wrote:
> On Thu, 23 Aug 2012 01:30, vali...@gmail.com said:
>
> > My plan is to modify the license for an upcoming release. Files making
> up
> > libencfs would be re-licensed under LGPL (was GPL). The main programs
> > (encfs, encfsctl) would remain GPL.
>
> I think I did some minor patches on the past. Just, in case I have no
> concerns to re-license any of my encfs code to the LGPL. But pretty
> please do not remove the “or any later version”; ie. use LGPLv2+ or v3+.
>
>
> Salam-Shalom,
>
> Werner
>
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Live Security Virtual Conference
Exclusive live event will cover all the ways today's security and
threat landscape has changed and how IT managers can respond. Discussions
will include endpoint security, mobile security and the latest in malware
threats. http://www.accelacomm.com/jaw/sfrnl04242012/114/50122263/
_______________________________________________
Encfs-users mailing list
Encfs-users@lists.sourceforge.net
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/encfs-users
