Le 20/05/2010 09:09, Will Robertson a écrit : > Hi, > > I already commented briefly on GitHub, but before we continue this discussion > we need to clear some things up: > > 1. We have code from ConTeXt which is in the GPL (v2, apparently) > > 2. Any derived work from that code must also be in the GPL. > > 3. Are we allowed to distribute luaotfload under CC0 with the ConTeXt files > under GPL? I didn't think so: > > "If you modify your copy or copies of the program or any portion of it, or > develop a program based upon it, you may distribute the resulting work > provided you do so under the GNU General Public License." > > 4. Do we *want* to have this weird double-licencing? If so, why? > > My suggestion is to have the whole bundle under a single licence. And because > the ConTeXt code is already GPL, so should all the rest. > FWIW, I fully agree with your points. IMO the whole package under GPLv2 is the better way to go.
>> Do you mean the rest of the code? I don't think so, you can distribute CC0 >> code under GPL, CC0 allows it. > > But we're in the reverse situation: you can't distribute GPL code under the > CC0 licence. > Right, that is the point. Manuel.
