From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Efraim Flashner Subject: Re: [PATCH] Add libiax Date: Tue, 31 May 2016 20:40:53 +0300 Message-ID: <20160531174053.GD13578@debian-netbook> References: <87shx17pbq.fsf@openmailbox.org> <20160529005554.GA20220@jasmine> <878tyrwck5.fsf@openmailbox.org> <20160531162555.GA32099@jasmine> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/signed; micalg=pgp-sha512; protocol="application/pgp-signature"; boundary="/3yNEOqWowh/8j+e" Return-path: Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([2001:4830:134:3::10]:57123) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1b7nfA-0007J0-Cj for guix-devel@gnu.org; Tue, 31 May 2016 13:41:09 -0400 Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1b7nf5-0003we-E9 for guix-devel@gnu.org; Tue, 31 May 2016 13:41:07 -0400 Received: from flashner.co.il ([178.62.234.194]:48695) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1b7nf5-0003ve-6k for guix-devel@gnu.org; Tue, 31 May 2016 13:41:03 -0400 Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20160531162555.GA32099@jasmine> List-Id: "Development of GNU Guix and the GNU System distribution." List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Errors-To: guix-devel-bounces+gcggd-guix-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Sender: "Guix-devel" To: Leo Famulari Cc: guix-devel@gnu.org --/3yNEOqWowh/8j+e Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Content-Disposition: inline Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable On Tue, May 31, 2016 at 12:25:55PM -0400, Leo Famulari wrote: > On Mon, May 30, 2016 at 02:50:02PM -0500, Lukas Gradl wrote: > > * gnu/packages/telephony.scm (libiax): New variable. >=20 > > + (license lgpl2.0)))) >=20 > In my final review, I found that some source files are licensed under > the GPL (no version specified) as well as one public-domain file. The > details are in the attached patch revision. >=20 > Since I don't understand the fine points of these things, I ask the > group: can a source distribution be LGPL 2.0 and include GPL components? I saw it explained another time that if the license is just "GPL" then we can read it as we see fit, which usually means GPL3+ (for those portions). --=20 Efraim Flashner =D7=90=D7=A4=D7=A8=D7=99=D7=9D = =D7=A4=D7=9C=D7=A9=D7=A0=D7=A8 GPG key =3D A28B F40C 3E55 1372 662D 14F7 41AA E7DC CA3D 8351 Confidentiality cannot be guaranteed on emails sent or received unencrypted --/3yNEOqWowh/8j+e Content-Type: application/pgp-signature; name="signature.asc" -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v2 iQIcBAEBCgAGBQJXTcyhAAoJEPTB05F+rO6ToVAQAJsSMb7tgcsJ5IMkkqpptUDv uWlBl+VodHiZ3x+SAidLeLMinl+3BI/B8cVZnGe+6A0t0CB1zZ/bpra2uvi8cJEv 1PLNNdlCZJS4lxsifEOk7lnIVS13eEiD3wZf5GCGiw3ADQ4N/ze7g429GhK5LNq8 EC1y030odL3Jx3Prpsd+lG9vEu0MuvysTOA6tJqjMpeGUFOJ8FPvCwP8kEQdi0y1 CS+KVkWi8qJijuVHQfdkMxcXEC4KFDTMOI99AfhM03M+4EJW3kKhTnWCKDs/HtDE ROrm6SUKMtRPFNXeVIeSQ6TLoev7trdCFPhxbSBbZihNurjy2rRWxpVEf6u50Pli OT6KK/Bg28a7Esgm6vWrhTUibHnq076HT/gFJckm5WTuGUc2J1i1FLHWnmyoqxWx p4NVCE2r1ryaviBoCq0zJpKJq7fYjlzT8iZzQmTTtk/YFDp/PrScMzQuDrRtf0Gm ah8j6DxSxdsWsB1pyFQE8BVMOAUORRwJkCkjpan2MKR6Mkl7F3CU2fWZaIICIjps J5HT90Uro0E0grC2PIJ60zWv/dn/Fa1zc6vvWLiXoxeWAQMU2XwN64qFsPx2Cm8u Md/L/rTn51P56O3+udJd5AoyTPicEvX3xzxm6bHLnBHlPEUtHPPl3WkZeB8ZBDqW amuIDyhrB2ZL1ebtbZCJ =AUgv -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- --/3yNEOqWowh/8j+e--