The source files don't in fact contain any copyright or license statements at all, so the entire project has questionable status. Normally you could relicense GPLv2 code as GPLv3, but that requires a proper header in each file.
Since it is a relatively small project, what I would do is simply rewrite it and license that properly (COPYING and COPYING.LESSER in top directory and copyright statement + license header in each file). -Pieter On Mon, Jul 15, 2013 at 8:56 PM, Diego Duclos <[email protected]> wrote: > I have, the project has around 8 contributors or so. > Sadly, roughly 4 of them didn't answer so far (it's been a few weeks since > I've sent the mail) > > > On Mon, Jul 15, 2013 at 8:44 PM, Pieter Hintjens <[email protected]> wrote: >> >> On Mon, Jul 15, 2013 at 8:14 PM, Diego Duclos <[email protected]> >> wrote: >> >> > In my case (why didn't I mention this ?) my specific problem is txZMQ. >> > Which >> > is, very sadly, a GPL'd lib >> >> Each project chooses its own license. We encourage people to use the >> same LGPLv3+static link exception as libzmq uses, but it's only a >> suggestion. As Stephen says, speak to the txZMQ author, he may be >> willing to use a compatible license. >> >> -Pieter >> _______________________________________________ >> zeromq-dev mailing list >> [email protected] >> http://lists.zeromq.org/mailman/listinfo/zeromq-dev > > > > _______________________________________________ > zeromq-dev mailing list > [email protected] > http://lists.zeromq.org/mailman/listinfo/zeromq-dev > _______________________________________________ zeromq-dev mailing list [email protected] http://lists.zeromq.org/mailman/listinfo/zeromq-dev
