Am 20.03.2014 10:57, schrieb Pieter Hintjens: -Snipp- > It's not practical to relicense libzmq to MPLv2, however it is for > other projects. We're starting with CZMQ, and will broaden this to > other projects over time. > > Does anyone have objections to this shift? If not, I'll document it on > the wiki page as a recommendation for new projects. The C4.1 process > already has MPLv2 as an allowed license.
Hello, can you clarify: do you plan to add the MPLv2 to the existing LGPLv3 license or do you plan to replace the LGPLv3 with the MPLv2? The latter might be troublesome as anyone creating a (L)GPL binary would then dual-license CZMQ anyway. Is this really simpler for legal teams than the static linking exception? As I am not a lawyer, my opinion is based on info "stolen" from https://www.gnu.org/licenses/license-list.html#MPL-2.0 Best regards, Olaf
signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature
_______________________________________________ zeromq-dev mailing list [email protected] http://lists.zeromq.org/mailman/listinfo/zeromq-dev
