Alex Hudson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > Hi Simon, > > Simon Josefsson wrote: >> RMS asked if there are is reason GnuTLS should remain LGPLv2.1+ instead >> of using LGPLv3+. >> >> The reasons I'm familiar with includes lynx under GPLv2-only. Gnucash >> is also said to contain GPLv2-only code. >> >> Are there other reasons not to use LGPLv3+? >> > > There are a number of applications out there that are GPLv2-only, > including the project I work on > (http://www.bongo-project.org/). OpenSSL isn't available for those who > can't relicense their projects, so not having GnuTLS be available > would be a big blow.
Thanks for the information. If you know of more GPLv2-only projects that use GnuTLS, that would be useful to know. Btw, Bongo looks relatively new, could you share any insight why you chose a GPLv2-only license? It looks bound to create problems sooner or later. >> I recall hearing about policies that mandate LGPLv2.1+ in some projects, >> for example the core libraries in GNOME, but I cannot find any reference >> to this out there. Anyone? >> > > IIRC, Gtk+ hackers have talked about moving to LGPLv3, but nothing has > actually been agreed. Ok. So maybe they actually don't have a LGPLv2.1+ policy. Thanks, Simon _______________________________________________ Help-gnutls mailing list [email protected] http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/help-gnutls
