On Tue, 2017-07-18 at 07:56 +0200, Alexandre Franke wrote: > On Mon, Jul 17, 2017 at 10:23 PM, Carlos Soriano via > desktop-devel-list <desktop-devel-list@gnome.org> wrote: > > This is done now in > > https://git.gnome.org/browse/nautilus/commit/?id=365ec7f7ac1cec51dc > > 0248dd05b17cb78252a788 > > I don’t think that’s sufficient though. Putting a LICENSE file in the > project directory just addresses the “You should have received a > copy” > provision, but doesn’t effectively place the code under that license. > You could even have several license files if parts of your project > are > under different licenses. > > That license file you put in your repository also states that you > should attach a notice to the program. It can take several form but > the recommended one is in the header of your source. In fact, there > is > already such a notice and it claims that the software is GPLv2+ > (https://git.gnome.org/browse/nautilus/tree/src/nautilus-main.c?id=36 > 5ec7f7ac1cec51dc0248dd05b17cb78252a788).
That's fine. The license of the compound work just has to be compatible with the individual files' licenses, it doesn't need to be the exact same one. For example, you can have a project mixing GPLv2+, GPLv3+ and BSD licensed files, and choose to have the compound work be GPLv3+. That also tells contributors that any new files in the project should be compatible with that overall license. > This brings us to another point: do you intend to use GPLv3 or > GPLv3+? > The notice should be explicit about it (again, as suggested by the > license you copied to your project). > > Cheers, > _______________________________________________ desktop-devel-list mailing list desktop-devel-list@gnome.org https://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/desktop-devel-list
