> On Sun, 18 Jan 2009 23:12:21 -0800 (PST), David Luyer wrote: > >> For any and all contributions I have made to JtR, please consider >> these contributions to be licensed under GPL version 2 as of the >> date of the submission of the patches to the JtR email list, which >> for the mentioned files was 2005. > > On Mon, 19 Jan 2009 00:33:32 +0100, Bucsay BalÃ¡zs wrote: > >> I think the license behove to bartavelle first, by the way gplv2 would >> be good for me too. > > Bartavelle already stated a license for "all his contributions", thus > including > this file. You can read its statement at: > > http://lists.alioth.debian.org/pipermail/pkg-john-devel/2009-January/000251.html > > The text of the license is as follows: > >> * This software may be modified, redistributed, and used for any >> purpose, >> * so long as its origin is acknowledged. > > Is it ok for both of you (David and BalÃ¡zs)?
In the same thread, Bartavelle previously also released his code under GPLv2: http://lists.alioth.debian.org/pipermail/pkg-john-devel/2009-January/000247.html BalÃ¡zs above states that "gplv2 would be good for me too". So it appears we are all happy with GPLv2 and I know Debian are generally happy with GPLv2. Why not just go with that? As per Bartavelle I would also be happy to dual license any contributions I have made if requested by SD. David. > For other choices, please read (also bartavelle): > > http://lists.alioth.debian.org/pipermail/pkg-john-devel/2009-January/000232.html > http://lists.alioth.debian.org/pipermail/pkg-john-devel/2009-January/000258.html > > Kindly, > David > > -- > . ''`. Debian maintainer | http://wiki.debian.org/DavidPaleino > : :' : Linuxer #334216 --|-- http://www.hanskalabs.net/ > `. `'` GPG: 1392B174 ----|---- http://snipr.com/qa_page > `- 2BAB C625 4E66 E7B8 450A C3E1 E6AA 9017 1392 B174 > -- Pkg-john-devel mailing list Pkgfirstname.lastname@example.org http://lists.alioth.debian.org/mailman/listinfo/pkg-john-devel