On Saturday 12 May 2007 15:22:15 Carsten Lohrke wrote: > On Samstag, 12. Mai 2007, Harald van Dijk wrote: > > Do you need to accept the unmodified GPL-2 for software licensed under > > the GPL-2 plus exception? No? Then GPL-2 does not belong in LICENSE, > > unless in a || group. > > Of course you accept the GPL plus the added exception. Just because an > exception exists, it does not become a completely different license. > This is a big part of the reason I was unsure. In this case it is the GPL licence with the exception to extend your ability to include it in other work. Talking to the author he has done this because the library is a pure template library and so linking exception makes no sense - there is nothing to link to.
I suspected that GPL-2 would probably be fine. This is far from an isolated case. Benoit (the author of Eigen) and Diego have pointed out to me that libstdc++ contains similarly licenced template code for the same reasons - the LGPL and the GPL with linking exception are meaningless in this case. Personally I would just like to get Eigen included, but didn't want to unnecessarily clutter our licences directory further. If anything it would be nice to come up with a more generic solution than adding this particular license with exception. The exception serves to make this license more permissive - i.e. it can be compiled into other code much as LGPL allows libraries to be linked to. I guess I could add it and we could fix the licence later if there is no clear consensus (or policy already in place). Thanks, Marcus
signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part.
