On 02/07/07, James Shaw <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
On 02/07/07, John-Mark Bell <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > Hi, > > You are receiving this email because our records suggest that you have > contributed to the NetSurf project (http://www.netsurf-browser.org) in > some way or other in the past. > > > 1) Formalise GPL version 2 as being the GPL version which NetSurf is > licensed under. This may be found at > http://www.gnu.org/licenses/gpl-2.0.html > > 2) Come to an agreement about whether to permit the user to relicense > the > software under future GPL versions. For reference, GPL version 3 > has > been recently released. This may be found at > http://www.gnu.org/licenses/gpl-3.0.html > > 3) Include a specific exemption to permit linking against OpenSSL. > > 4) License the Messages files, window templates and documentation > under > the GPL, as per proposals 1-3. > > 5) License supporting artwork under either the GPL (as per proposals > 1-3) > or some less restrictive licence such as MIT > ( http://www.opensource.org/licenses/mit-license.php). I'm happy for my contributions to be licensed under GPL2. I have no objection to it being relicensed under a future GPL version, nor to the exemption to link to OpenSSL.
To clarify on the relicensing issue (point 2 above), I'd prefer the relicensing clause not to be present, though I wouldn't object should the clause ultimately be included. Thanks James Shaw
