What's already been said is good advice. At first, it may be a bit
tricky to under copyright and licenses. When I started out, I for the
longest held back on releasing software / packages because I somehow
thought I basically had to make a final decision on the license at
that moment and that
On 6 November 2016 at 16:53, Lenth, Russell V wrote:
| Permission of "all other copyright holders" as in developers of all packages
that depend on 'foo'?
Please do have a look at the two FAQs I referenced before:
https://www.gnu.org/licenses/gpl-faq.en.html
Permission of "all other copyright holders" as in developers of all packages
that depend on 'foo'?
Russ
Sent from my iPhone
> On Nov 6, 2016, at 9:31 AM, Duncan Murdoch wrote:
>
>> On 06/11/2016 4:11 AM, Lenth, Russell V wrote:
>> A correction and clarification...
On 6 November 2016 at 09:11, Lenth, Russell V wrote:
| A correction and clarification...
|
| It is MY package's GPL-2 license that is being violated by the other package
-- not its GPL-3 license.
No, let's stop here. I don't think that is legally (or conceptually !!)
possible. Your code, your
A correction and clarification...
It is MY package's GPL-2 license that is being violated by the other package --
not its GPL-3 license.
Let me lay it out with some generic names:
* The 'foo' package specifies a GPL-2 license
* The 'bar' package depends on 'foo', but specifies a GPL-3
On 6 November 2016 at 02:28, Lenth, Russell V wrote:
| I received an email from a user telling me that another package that
| depends on my package is licensed GPL(>=3), whereas mine is licensed GPL-2;
| and that therefore, the other package is in violation of its GPL-3 license.
That is