Rafael,
I would prefer the second option, because we don't distribute the
software any longer.
Maybe it is sufficient to replace the old license under the copyright
line in the C file with the standard LGPL header? We can use version
3 or higher of the LGPL, unless Octave has a different policy.
Thanks.
Lieven
Stephen Boyd wrote:
whatever is easiest. i am happy with semidef_prog having either license.
Rafael Laboissiere wrote:
* Lieven Vandenberghe <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> [2007-08-06 09:13]:
I can see why our license is ambiguous. When we wrote it in 1994,
we intended it to mean that the program is entirely free, for any
purpose (including commercial) and without any restriction.
If it is easier if we switch to a standard free license, I would
choose the LGPL.
Thanks for your reply.
As regards the Debian package, the best situation would be that you
do a new
release of the software with the changed license. If you are not
willing to
do it because semidef_prog is already old software and not maintained
anymore, I will release a new version of the package stating that it
is released now under the LGPL (if Stephen Boyd agrees, of course)
and will add
the URL of this bug report discussion [1].
[1] http://bugs.debian.org/435214
Best regards,
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
