Re: relicensing libunistring to "dual LGPLv3+ or GPLv2"

[Eric Blake]

On 11/11/2016 07:44 PM, Bruno Haible wrote:
> Hi,
> 
> It has been decided that libunistring is going to be relicensed under
> "dual LGPLv3+ or GPLv2" license. See
> http://lists.gnu.org/archive/html/bug-libunistring/2016-11/msg00003.html
> 
> To this effect, the libunistring modules in gnulib that are currently under
> LGPLv3+ need to be relicensed to 'LGPLv3+ or GPLv2'. Those modules that
> are under LGPLv2+ stay under LGPLv2+.
> 
> 1)
> This proposed patch does this. It also extends gnulib-tool so that
>   * the option --lgpl accepts the form --lgpl=3orGPLv2
>   * the compatibility checks consider this 'LGPLv3+ or GPLv2' license
>     (namely, the allowed relicensings are:
>      LGPLv2+ --> 'LGPLv3+ or GPLv2'

LGPL can always be tightened to GPL, and the + means it can be upgraded
from 2 to 3, so this is correct.

>      'LGPLv3+ or GPLv2' --> LGPLv3+ = LGPL

This says you are picking only one of the two options, so it is correct.

>      'LGPLv3+ or GPLv2' --> GPLv2+

This one is possible because LGPLv3+ can always be tightened to GPLv3+;
it is written GPLv2+ because of the GPLv2 option.

>      'LGPLv3+ or GPLv2' --> GPLv3+ = GPL

And this says you are picking only the LGPLv3+ option, then tightening
it to GPLv3+.

Okay, I agree with all four of those transitions.


> 
> === Paul, Eric, Ludovic, ===
> 
> Would you agree to relicense your changes to lib/isnan.c
> under 'LGPLv3+ or GPLv2'?
> Or possibly even under LGPLv2+?

I'd lean towards the more-permissive LGPLv2+, but 'LGPLv3+ or GPLv2' is
also fine.

-- 
Eric Blake   eblake redhat com    +1-919-301-3266
Libvirt virtualization library http://libvirt.org

signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature