On 05/04/16 12:33 +0200, Dejan Muhamedagic wrote: > On Wed, Mar 30, 2016 at 05:27:20PM +0200, Jan Pokorný wrote: >> On 24/03/16 17:18 +0100, Jan Pokorný wrote: >>> On 22/03/16 19:18 +0100, Dejan Muhamedagic wrote: >>>> On Mon, Mar 21, 2016 at 10:03:12PM +0100, Jan Pokorný wrote: >>>>> On 18/03/16 16:16 +0100, Lars Ellenberg wrote: >>>>>> So I move to change it to GPLv2+, for everything that is a "program", >>>>>> and LGPLv2.1 for everything that may be viewed as a library. >>>>>> >>>>>> At least that's how I will correct the wording in the >>>>>> affected files in the heartbeat mercurial. >>>>> >>>>> In the light of the presented historic excursion, that feels natural. >>>>> >>>>> Assuming no licensors want to speak up, the question now stands: >>>>> Is it the same conclusion that has been reached by booth and sbd >>>>> package maintainers (Dejan and Andrew respectively, if I follow what's >>>>> authoritative nowadays properly) and are these willing to act on it to >>>>> prevent the mentioned ambiguous interpretation once forever? >>>> >>>> Yes, that's all fine with me. >>>> >>>>> I will be happy to provide actual patches, >>>> >>>> Even better :) >>> >>> Added the "maint: clarify GPLv2.1+ -> GPLv2+ in the license notices" >>> (e294fa2) commit into https://github.com/ClusterLabs/booth/pull/23 >>> if that's OK with you, Dejan. >> >> I hope we are all on the same page as Andrew went ahead there (thanks). >> Alas, I've noticed there were some subtleties neglected in there so, >> with regrets, a separate (and hopefully final) pull request: >> >> https://github.com/ClusterLabs/booth/pull/24 > > This got merged too. Thanks!
Neverending story, it seems. Regrettably, please accept also https://github.com/ClusterLabs/booth/pull/33 to call this license clarification effort complete, Dejan. -- Jan (Poki)
pgpNOD1IwzaMT.pgp
Description: PGP signature
_______________________________________________ Developers mailing list Developers@clusterlabs.org http://clusterlabs.org/mailman/listinfo/developers
