On 18 Sep 2007, at 11:11, Quentin Mathé wrote: > I'm happy with relicensing SystemConfig under BSD.
Well, that simplifies things a lot :-) > If the framework remains under LGPL2 for now, I think it's probably > simpler to add a new file (or a note in COPYING) summarizing the > license of each framework file rather than creating subprojects or > subframeworks for BSD vs LGPL2. Well, this is valid only if a > subframework isn't needed… My reasoning is based on the following > understanding: you can directly integrate BSD-licensed files into an > LGPL2 library because the COPYING file "transparently" relicenses all > aggregated files not already under LGPL2. Can someone confirm or deny > it? The benefit of this approach to me was you are still free to > extract aggregated code under its original license at later point. Almost. What you describe would be the case for the GPL, but the LGPL there are a couple of slight differences. It's close enough, however (none of the special cases are ones I particularly care about). David _______________________________________________ Etoile-dev mailing list [email protected] https://mail.gna.org/listinfo/etoile-dev
