On Wed, 2011-01-05 at 12:51 +0100, Jonas Smedegaard wrote:
On Wed, Jan 05, 2011 at 12:08:20AM -0500, Hans-Christoph Steiner wrote:
Ok, I updated the debian/copyright and pushed the changes to
git.debian.org. Its ready for re-upload.
I just wanted to add that the previous condition was
Am 05.01.2011 20:09, schrieb Hans-Christoph Steiner:
The library as a whole is licensed using GPL-2 by upstream in the
LICENSE.txt file. The relicensing was done upstream.
You are probably referring to the following clause in the LGPL-2.x:
You may opt to apply the terms of the ordinary GNU
On Wed, Jan 05, 2011 at 02:09:44PM -0500, Hans-Christoph Steiner wrote:
On Wed, 2011-01-05 at 12:51 +0100, Jonas Smedegaard wrote:
On Wed, Jan 05, 2011 at 12:08:20AM -0500, Hans-Christoph Steiner
wrote:
Ok, I updated the debian/copyright and pushed the changes to
git.debian.org. Its ready
On Wed, Jan 05, 2011 at 12:08:20AM -0500, Hans-Christoph Steiner wrote:
Ok, I updated the debian/copyright and pushed the changes to
git.debian.org. Its ready for re-upload.
I just wanted to add that the previous condition was legal, LGPL-2.1
files can be incorporated into a GPL-2 project,
Hi Maintainer,
I have found several LGPL licensed files but this license is not documented.
Torsten
===
Please feel free to respond to this email if you don't understand why
your files were rejected, or if you upload new files which address our
concerns.
Ok, I updated the debian/copyright and pushed the changes to
git.debian.org. Its ready for re-upload.
I just wanted to add that the previous condition was legal, LGPL-2.1
files can be incorporated into a GPL-2 project, so it was correct to say
that the whole project could be used under the
