[Sorry, I'm flipping back and forth between mail clients at the moment and
I appear to have inadvertently marked a lot of mail as read that wasn't.]

Excerpts from Carl's message of Fri Dec 04 01:07:07 +0000 2009:
> On Mon, 30 Nov 2009 20:38:00 +0000, James Rowe wrote:
> >   I had planned on posting a patch for inclusion in packaging/Gentoo per
> > Carl's mail[2], but the whole GPL 2 vs 3 thing made me put it on the
> > backburner and I haven't looked again. Might still be useful to people
> > unless there is going to be a "real" release soon, as then it would be
> > easier to push for it on bugs.gentoo.org.
> Is the GPLv3 a problem for you and your ebuild for some reason, or is it
> just that you happened to start with a GPLv2 file or so?

  GPL v3 isn't a problem for me personally.  The problem is Gentoo ebuilds in
the main tree are all GPL v2, and I accepted changes with a clear GPL v2 header
on the ebuild.  I don't claim to understand the licensing stuff enough to know
if mixing the two together is valid, so I just moved on to something more fun.

  I might have pushed the issue if it was important, but it isn't even
a valuable change.

> I'm definitely interested in hearing, since this is the first project
> I've let loose myself under the GPLv3. So far, it hasn't seemed to be a
> big impediment to contributions, which I think is great.

  It definitely doesn't seem to have been an impediment.  git-rank-contributors
shows 29 contributors already, and that is very impressive given the age of the

-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: signature.asc
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 290 bytes
Desc: not available

Reply via email to