Re: [PATCH 01/10] python/aqmp: add explicit GPLv2 license to legacy.py

[Andrea Bolognani]

On Thu, Mar 24, 2022 at 09:03:07AM +0000, Daniel P. Berrangé wrote:
> > Overall making it *all* GPLv2+ compat is going to be important if you
> > want people to be comfortable using it. If it has a mix of GPLv2+
> > and GPLv2-only code in the source tarball, then the overall combined
> > work will have to be considered GPLv2-only and that will put people
> > off using it. Even if they could theoreticallly restrict their usage
> > to only the GPLv2+ parts, many won't get that far before moving on.

Agreed.

> Actually I'll go furthuer and suggest that if we're going to do a
> relicensing at all, and your goal is to encourage usage, then GPLv2+
> is the wrong choice. Use LGPLv2+ if you want to facilitate usage, while
> retaining a copyleft license.

Does LGPL make sense in the context of Python, where there is no
linking?

-- 
Andrea Bolognani / Red Hat / Virtualization