On Sun, 10 Mar 2013 22:17:32 +0100 Michael Haberler <mai...@mah.priv.at> wrote:
> I have identified a small piece of code which could take on an > important function in HAL/RTAPI. If it were integrated, it would > become part of the HAL API. > > That code is currently GPL2only. > > The author has expressed willingness to relicense after I told him we > might eventually move to (likely) GPL2+ and pointed to the problem we > would incur if he were unwilling to relicense. > > My question is: what should I ask him: make it LPGPL, GPL2+ or what > else? Please advise. Note: All this is just my opinion :) It depends on whether it is a library or will be used as a library. If so, then "LGPLv2.1 or later". If you consult the chart on this page: http://www.gnu.org/licenses/gpl-faq.html#AllCompatibility you'll see that "LGPLv2.1 or later" is the least problematic license to combine with other GPL licenses. If it's totally, completely _not_ a library, then "GPLv2 or later" would be a good way to go. The most important part of this is, as we've seen over the last few days, the "or later" part :) Thanks, Matt ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ Symantec Endpoint Protection 12 positioned as A LEADER in The Forrester Wave(TM): Endpoint Security, Q1 2013 and "remains a good choice" in the endpoint security space. For insight on selecting the right partner to tackle endpoint security challenges, access the full report. http://p.sf.net/sfu/symantec-dev2dev _______________________________________________ Emc-developers mailing list Emc-developers@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/emc-developers
