savannah-register-public
[Top][All Lists]
Advanced

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

[task #16459] Submission of All Call TCP/IP-over-HTTP System


From: Ineiev
Subject: [task #16459] Submission of All Call TCP/IP-over-HTTP System
Date: Mon, 6 Nov 2023 13:15:19 -0500 (EST)

Follow-up Comment #4, task #16459 (project administration):

[comment #3 comment #3:]
> 
> With respect to one file, protocol.txt, I could use some advice.  It is not
part of the program per se, it is the protocol I wrote which the program
implements.  I'm not sure a protocol (which one does not want altered) is
appropriate for GPL or FDL license. When there is more documentation, I can
included the protocol as an invariant section.  Until then, do you have a
suggestion?

Let's start with clarifying why it can't be an invariant section.  Do you have
any ideas yourself?

> FreePascal: https://wiki.lazarus.freepascal.org/FPC_modified_LGPL
> LGPL v2.0 with static library linking exception (similar to GCC and other
runtime libraries). A page explaining their license and rationale is here:
https://wiki.lazarus.freepascal.org/licensing

Thank you!

> a vanilla MIT license.

It looks like we don't listen to each other.  Too bad.

> DIMime: I'm not using it as a library, so referencing it as such was not
really correct.  I modified and incorporated one file from it into my project.
 With the written permission of the author, I was able to license this file as
GPL v3.0.  That is noted in the file base64url.pas.   Its history, original
license and copyright, and current status are noted there.

I'm not convinced the result of such integration is
GPLv3-or-later-compatible.

The notice only says, the file was allowed to be used in a package licensed
under the GPL 3.0, and that allows for a range of interpretations, including
the permission for private use only; and at any rate, it says nothing about
the versions of the GPL higher than 3.0.

> It was originally released under the MPL v1.1, which I understand that GNU
considers GPL compatible

Could you tell where the GNU Project says MPL v1.1 is GPL-compatible?


    _______________________________________________________

Reply to this item at:

  <https://savannah.nongnu.org/task/?16459>

_______________________________________________
Message sent via Savannah
https://savannah.nongnu.org/




reply via email to

[Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread]