On 17/09/14 23:42, Julien Vehent wrote: > It is a Mozilla project called Masche: https://github.com/mozilla/masche > We are considering using part of the GDB source code to generate core > dumps, which is under GPL3. We *may* have to modify some of that GPL3 code.
I'm sorry I can't tell by reading the docs on that site: is Masche a standalone tool, or something which is linked into e.g. Firefox? If the latter, are you hoping to distribute builds of Firefox with Masche built in? Why is Mozilla building Masche? >> What do you mean by "use, modify and redistribute". Do you implicitly >> mean "as a linked-in part of the application"? > > I mean that we want to use and modify GPL3 source code, and distribute > binaries that are built from MPL2 and GPL3 source code. OK. Those binaries would be under GPLv3. You would be required to provide source code. Of that source code, the originally-GPLv3 bits would still be GPLv3, and the originally-MPL2 bits would be dual-licensed MPL2/GPLv3, when you provided them. However, a 3rd party could choose to resolve the dual license down to a single (in either direction) if they wished. > So, if I understand correctly, all Mozilla code, including our own > modifications to GPL3 code, stay under the MPL2 license. No; see above. The Mozilla code would become dual-licensed GPLv3/MPL2. You would probably choose to license modifications to the GPLv3ed code as GPLv3-only; there's not much point making them MPL2 as well. > Do we need to change the wording of the LICENSE file of the project? Or > is a License header at the top of each file sufficient? The question you need to ask before this is: is this something Mozilla policy allows us to do? :-) To answer that, I'd need to understand the answer to my first question above. Gerv _______________________________________________ legal mailing list [email protected] https://lists.mozilla.org/listinfo/legal
