On Sat, 2011-09-03 at 23:17 +0200, Kevin Kofler wrote:
Nils Philippsen wrote:
Legal question: is it better to put this in its own subpackage to be
able to specify this individual license, or would GIMP better have
GPLv3+ and LGPLv3+ and (GPLv2 or GPLv3) as its license?
Not an actual
Nils Philippsen wrote:
Legal question: is it better to put this in its own subpackage to be
able to specify this individual license, or would GIMP better have
GPLv3+ and LGPLv3+ and (GPLv2 or GPLv3) as its license?
Not an actual answer to your question, but wouldn't the license of the PDF
On Thu, 2011-09-01 at 20:42 +0200, Nils Philippsen wrote:
It seems one always forgets something... well, better this than leaving
the stove on.
On Thu, 2011-09-01 at 12:45 +0200, Nils Philippsen wrote:
Here's the gist (in no particular order):
- GIMP 2.7 and later is licensed as GPLv3+
On Thu, 2011-09-01 at 21:24 +0100, Dr Andrew John Hughes wrote:
Legal question: is it better to put this in its own subpackage to be
able to specify this individual license, or would GIMP better have
GPLv3+ and LGPLv3+ and (GPLv2 or GPLv3) as its license?
if you combine them in a