From: Alex Vong <alexvong1995@gmail.com>
To: Arun Isaac <arunisaac@systemreboot.net>
Cc: guix-devel <guix-devel@gnu.org>
Subject: Re: Question about multiple licenses
Date: Mon, 28 Aug 2017 18:45:20 +0800 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <87mv6kj7i7.fsf@gmail.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <681c721c.AEQAPExWoDUAAAAAAAAAAAOtZhgAAAACwQwAAAAAAAW9WABZoSX-@mailjet.com> (Arun Isaac's message of "Sat, 26 Aug 2017 13:10:32 +0530")
[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 2310 bytes --]
Arun Isaac <arunisaac@systemreboot.net> writes:
> I'm packaging linkchecker.
> https://debbugs.gnu.org/cgi/bugreport.cgi?bug=27468
>
> Different files of linkchecker have different license headers. The
> license field of the package is as follows:
>
> (license (list l:gpl2+
> l:bsd-2 ; linkcheck/better_exchook2.py
> l:bsd-3 ; linkcheck/colorama.py
> l:psfl ; linkcheck/gzip2.py
> l:expat ; linkcheck/mem.py
> l:isc ; third_party/dnspython
> l:asl2.0))
>
> gpl2+ is a stricter license than the other licenses, and covers the
> "program as a whole". So, do we really need to mention the other
> licenses, especially those licenses which cover only one source file? Is
> it a good idea to hide the multiple licenses from the user, and just
> mention gpl2+ as the license of the whole package?
OK, maybe this is a little bit late... But I would like to share my
opinions. I think there are actually two cases: 1. combining (L)GPL with
(L)GPL and 2. combining (L)GPL with non-(L)GPL.
For case 1, yes, the whole work can be re-licensed under the "stricter"
license, providing that we have the "or later" clause. So GPLv2+ with
LGPLv3+ can be re-licensed to GPLv3+, but GPLv2 with LGPLv3+ cannot be
re-licensed to GPLv3+, since the GPLv2 license does not have the
"or later" clause. For details, see the GPL compatibility matrix[0].
For case 2, well, the idea is the same. Unless the non-(L)GPL license
has an explicit clause allowing it to (recursively) re-license to
(L)GPL. For instance, CC-BY-SA-4.0 can be re-license to GPLv3, but BSD-2
cannot be re-license to GPLv3+.
Based on the above general argument, I think we should list all the
licenses instead of just GPLv2+ since it would be inaccurate to say that
the whole program is under just GPLv2+.
Also, in this particular case, since ASL2.0 is incompatible with GPLv2,
we actually need to take advantage of the "or later" clause, and
"upgrades" it to "GPLv3+". Listing the license as GPLv2+ would confuse
the user that GPLv2 covers the program, but in fact it is "effectively"
GPLv3.
Of course, I am not a lawyer. I only get the info from reading the
web. So I could be saying nonsense...
[0]: https://www.gnu.org/licenses/gpl-faq.en.html#AllCompatibility
[-- Attachment #2: signature.asc --]
[-- Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 832 bytes --]
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2017-08-28 10:45 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 16+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2017-08-26 7:40 Question about multiple licenses Arun Isaac
2017-08-28 10:45 ` Alex Vong [this message]
2017-08-28 17:25 ` Arun Isaac
2017-08-28 17:29 ` Efraim Flashner
2017-08-29 6:30 ` Arun Isaac
2017-09-01 11:43 ` Dave Love
2017-09-02 16:54 ` Alex Vong
2017-09-07 16:21 ` Dave Love
2017-09-03 11:45 ` Arun Isaac
2017-09-04 14:57 ` Ludovic Courtès
2017-09-07 16:20 ` Dave Love
2017-09-10 20:54 ` Ludovic Courtès
2017-09-11 11:29 ` Alex Vong
2017-09-11 12:45 ` Andy Wingo
2017-09-12 22:15 ` Dave Love
2017-09-12 22:13 ` Dave Love
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=87mv6kj7i7.fsf@gmail.com \
--to=alexvong1995@gmail.com \
--cc=arunisaac@systemreboot.net \
--cc=guix-devel@gnu.org \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
Code repositories for project(s) associated with this external index
https://git.savannah.gnu.org/cgit/guix.git
This is an external index of several public inboxes,
see mirroring instructions on how to clone and mirror
all data and code used by this external index.