Hi David, On 2013-12-23, David Koontz wrote: > The ghdl source code is distributed under GPLv2 (but can be > redistributed via or-later).
Oh, ok. Thanks for clarifying. That is what I mean with GPLv2-or-later and what Tristan calls GPLv2+. I was worried for a moment because some software projects use a modified copyright statement where the "or any later version" phrase is removed. This practice is often called GPLv2-only. Such works can not be distributed under GPLv3, which causes all kinds of problems. It is clear to me now that this does not apply to GHDL. > If you're not going to preserve those freedoms for those interacting > through a network service the effect is the same as distributing > under say a BSD type license. And if someone isn't will to abide by > that they can do the work themselves. I fully agree with your free-software ideology. The AGPL can certainly help to realize that (although it may not be particularly important in the case of GHDL). But I don't think there is much to gain from a binary distribution under a different license than its source code. It does not really restrict what anybody can do with GHDL, and it does not solve any legal risks that I can see. Joris.
signature.asc
Description: PGP signature
_______________________________________________ Ghdl-discuss mailing list [email protected] https://mail.gna.org/listinfo/ghdl-discuss
