Hello Michael, > On Apr 10, 2021, at 3:20 PM, Michael Brutman <[email protected]> wrote: > > Gents (Jerome and Rugxulo in particular) ... > > As per > https://www.ibiblio.org/pub/micro/pc-stuff/freedos/files/distributions/1.2/repos/pkg-html/fdnet.html > > <https://www.ibiblio.org/pub/micro/pc-stuff/freedos/files/distributions/1.2/repos/pkg-html/fdnet.html> > FDNET is being distributed under GPL V2. However, it includes mTCP source > code which is licensed under GPL V3. As per > https://www.gnu.org/licenses/license-list.en.html > <https://www.gnu.org/licenses/license-list.en.html> that's not allowed ... > the two licenses are not compatible. You just can't relicense something that > I provided as GPL3. > > Worse is that you are distributing a version of the code that is 7 years out > of date ... > > Please fix this.
The GPL v2 was only the license for the FDNET batch program itself and was not meant to cover any other programs that were included in the package. It was not an attempt to re-license your software. As you can see, the GPL v3 license was included with your program sources in the package. However, you are correct that the listing for FDNET on the software repository should not have been GPL v2. Furthermore, you are correct that GPL v3 is not compatible with v2. I apologize for the mistake and any confusion it may have caused. I have taken the git repository for FDNET offline and pulled it’s packages from the Software Repositories. The FDNET package will require further review. It may be updated to resolve any conflicting license issue. However at this point, FDNET may just be discontinued. Thank you for bringing this issue to my attention. Once again, I am sorry for the misunderstanding. Jerome
_______________________________________________ Freedos-user mailing list [email protected] https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/freedos-user
