On Mon, Nov 22, 2010 at 8:04 AM, Michael Schumacher <schum...@gmx.de> wrote:
>> Von: Christopher Curtis <ccurt...@gmail.com>
>> *** (Sven, Mitch) ***
>> This LICENSE text should probably be updated as 'Section 2' of GPLv3
>> doesn't talk about aggregations - it's been moved into section 5. It
>> might also be useful to address this issue directly as the GPLv2 is
>> generally well understood to allow command line usage as an
>> 'aggregation', but GPLv3 seems to muddy this distinction.
> At the moment I'm not even sure if GIMP should be licensed under GPLv3
> without a much better understanding of the license.
> For example, the fact that it is now impossible to use GPLv2-only libraries
> in plug-in wasn't considered at all. It's not such much the fact that we
> can't use them anymore, rather the problem of no one even thinking about it
> when we changed the license version to v3.
> I have contacted the Freedom Task Force of the FSF in order to get help, and
> they requested more details. Unfortunately my spare time (or the lack
> thereof) didn't allow me to write a reply yet.
> I'd be glad to learn about any additional side-effects of a GPLv3-licensed
> GIMP (note that libgimp* is licensed under LGPLv3) that may surprise us - but
> please base them on actual FSF information and not mere speculation.
Since a long time ago, we had an exception of the license for plug-ins
in a sense that GIMP plug-ins can be non GPL. If you as much as take a
look at the LICENSE file provided in the tree, it is at the second and
Therefore, there should be no problem in suiong GPLv2 or any other
license for libraries linking to plug-ins.
> Neu: GMX De-Mail - Einfach wie E-Mail, sicher wie ein Brief!
> Jetzt De-Mail-Adresse reservieren: http://portal.gmx.net/de/go/demail
> Gimp-developer mailing list
Gimp-developer mailing list