El lun, 23-04-2007 a las 21:35 +0100, Robert Osfield escribió: > Hi Jan, > > On 4/23/07, Jan Ciger <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > I hope that you realize that with a LGPL license you cannot really > > "control" anything - if somebody gets unhappy about the code for > > whatever reason, they will fork it and you cannot do anything about it > > if they obey the license. That is finally one of the freedoms (L)GPL is > > all about - freedom to tinker. BTW, that is how the GPL osgCal fork came > > to existence as well. > > As far as I'm aware you can't relicense a LGPL library to GPL without > permission from the copyright owners. If osgCal GPL'd version is a > derivative of the LGPL version then this looks like a possible > copyright violation, unless it was sanctioned by the original > copyright owners.
Loic had my permission to relicense the osgCal project. I renamed my own project to osgCal2 to keep the LGPL branch. I did it this way to help Loic to introduce the GPL osgCal into Debian distribution, and to face the reality: at that moment, the LGPL branch was completely stopped and the GPL one was very active. I've just removed Loic from the administrators list of osgCal(2) sourceforge project (I think that it doesn't make sense to have him as admin of a project in which he doesn't contribute anymore), and added Vladimir as developer. By the way, I'm very happy to see the LGPL branch alive again, and I can't wait to see Vladimir's changes in my box! In the last months only Jose Antonio Iglesias gave it a bit of life :( Regards. _______________________________________________ osg-users mailing list [email protected] http://openscenegraph.net/mailman/listinfo/osg-users http://www.openscenegraph.org/
