From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Path: news.gmane.org!not-for-mail From: Marcin Borkowski Newsgroups: gmane.emacs.help Subject: Re: What license to use for Emacs libraries? Date: Wed, 19 Aug 2015 01:21:03 +0200 Message-ID: <874mjwmbds.fsf@mbork.pl> References: <877fosmhmv.fsf@mbork.pl> NNTP-Posting-Host: plane.gmane.org Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain X-Trace: ger.gmane.org 1439940097 32680 80.91.229.3 (18 Aug 2015 23:21:37 GMT) X-Complaints-To: usenet@ger.gmane.org NNTP-Posting-Date: Tue, 18 Aug 2015 23:21:37 +0000 (UTC) To: help-gnu-emacs@gnu.org Original-X-From: help-gnu-emacs-bounces+geh-help-gnu-emacs=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Wed Aug 19 01:21:29 2015 Return-path: Envelope-to: geh-help-gnu-emacs@m.gmane.org Original-Received: from lists.gnu.org ([208.118.235.17]) by plane.gmane.org with esmtp (Exim 4.69) (envelope-from ) id 1ZRqC6-00039B-EO for geh-help-gnu-emacs@m.gmane.org; Wed, 19 Aug 2015 01:21:26 +0200 Original-Received: from localhost ([::1]:59958 helo=lists.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1ZRqC5-0000k2-Dv for geh-help-gnu-emacs@m.gmane.org; Tue, 18 Aug 2015 19:21:25 -0400 Original-Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([2001:4830:134:3::10]:43930) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1ZRqBs-0000jk-68 for help-gnu-emacs@gnu.org; Tue, 18 Aug 2015 19:21:13 -0400 Original-Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1ZRqBn-0006ZP-DC for help-gnu-emacs@gnu.org; Tue, 18 Aug 2015 19:21:12 -0400 Original-Received: from mail.mojserwer.eu ([2a01:5e00:2:52::8]:38966) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1ZRqBn-0006YX-5v for help-gnu-emacs@gnu.org; Tue, 18 Aug 2015 19:21:07 -0400 Original-Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by mail.mojserwer.eu (Postfix) with ESMTP id A2C88572004 for ; Wed, 19 Aug 2015 01:21:06 +0200 (CEST) X-Virus-Scanned: Debian amavisd-new at mail.mojserwer.eu Original-Received: from mail.mojserwer.eu ([127.0.0.1]) by localhost (mail.mojserwer.eu [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id Ip1Cen7n08Os for ; Wed, 19 Aug 2015 01:21:04 +0200 (CEST) Original-Received: from localhost (103-115.echostar.pl [213.156.103.115]) by mail.mojserwer.eu (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 8BF1553201C for ; Wed, 19 Aug 2015 01:21:04 +0200 (CEST) In-reply-to: X-detected-operating-system: by eggs.gnu.org: Error: Malformed IPv6 address (bad octet value). X-Received-From: 2a01:5e00:2:52::8 X-BeenThere: help-gnu-emacs@gnu.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.14 Precedence: list List-Id: Users list for the GNU Emacs text editor List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Errors-To: help-gnu-emacs-bounces+geh-help-gnu-emacs=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Original-Sender: help-gnu-emacs-bounces+geh-help-gnu-emacs=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Xref: news.gmane.org gmane.emacs.help:106694 Archived-At: On 2015-08-18, at 23:53, Stefan Monnier wrote: >> Does that mean that releasing Emacs libraries under GPLv2 is illegal? > > Pretty much, yes. Since they necessarily link to Emacs's own code which > is GPLv3+, you have to use a license that's compatible with GPLv3+. > > Note that GPLv2+ is one such compatible license (as opposed to GPLv2). > OK, thanks for the clarification. As I said a moment ago, the distinction between GPLvn and GPLvn+ escaped me. That explains a lot. (Still, all this licensing stuff feels much like craziness to me.) >> I did a cursory check, and it seems that all libraries built-in in my >> Emacs are GPLv3, but some other are not: > > No, they're GPLv3+ (most licenses out there implicitly say "this version > or any later version of it", whereas the GPL is more strict and you > have to explicitly say "GPLv2 or later"). > >> for instance, my copy of Icicles has GPLv2, and some code on EmacsWiki >> has GPLv2. > > If it's stritcly "GPLv2 and no later" then it's probably an error. No, it's "GPLv2 or later" (at least with Icicles), so everything is fine there. Still, it is kind of funny: it is not enough to look into the file named LICENSE to learn what license the code is under. >> Does that mean that GitHub is a part of a sinister software-patent >> conspiracy or something? > > That wouldn't be a surprise, now, would it? Now that Phillip warned me (implicitly) about GitHub police visiting me at 5am with handcuffs I'm afraid to say anything more on this topic. ;-) > Stefan Best, -- Marcin Borkowski http://octd.wmi.amu.edu.pl/en/Marcin_Borkowski Faculty of Mathematics and Computer Science Adam Mickiewicz University