2010/10/20 Denys Dmytriyenko de...@denix.org:
.
GPLv2 and GPLv3 are not compatible. Thus, there cannot be a derivative work
that combines those two. But if one piece of code is GPLv2+ and another is
GPLv3, the resulting combination is licensed under GPLv3.
So, it's always good to know which
On Mon, Oct 11, 2010 at 08:53:41PM +0200, Frans Meulenbroeks wrote:
2010/10/11 Maupin, Chase chase.mau...@ti.com:
[...]
-LICENSE = GPLv2
+LICENSE = GPLv2+
Doe we want this?
I think most GPLv2 code carries the clause:
This program is free software; you can redistribute it
] recipe licenses: update recipe LICENSE fields
On Mon, Oct 11, 2010 at 02:53:59PM -0500, Maupin, Chase wrote:
I'm not sure if it is a policy. Haven't seen it being pulished as such.
Having said that, I have no problems with it (although there is no
problem with enforcing patents or so
To: openembedded-devel@lists.openembedded.org
Subject: Re: [oe] [PATCHv2] recipe licenses: update recipe LICENSE fields
On Mon, Oct 11, 2010 at 02:53:59PM -0500, Maupin, Chase wrote:
I'm not sure if it is a policy. Haven't seen it being pulished as such.
Having said that, I have
Sent: Wednesday, October 20, 2010 1:16 PM
To: openembedded-devel@lists.openembedded.org
Subject: Re: [oe] [PATCHv2] recipe licenses: update recipe LICENSE
fields
On Mon, Oct 11, 2010 at 02:53:59PM -0500, Maupin, Chase wrote:
I'm not sure if it is a policy. Haven't seen it being
On 10/20/2010 08:25 PM, Denys Dmytriyenko wrote:
In OE we've been using this term for some time now. Although, still too many
old recipes use old notations, sometimes even as generic as just plain GPL
w/o specifying the exact version. It wasn't as critical before, but these
days
OE is
: Wednesday, October 20, 2010 1:16 PM
To: openembedded-devel@lists.openembedded.org
Subject: Re: [oe] [PATCHv2] recipe licenses: update recipe LICENSE fields
On Mon, Oct 11, 2010 at 02:53:59PM -0500, Maupin, Chase wrote:
I'm not sure if it is a policy. Haven't seen it being pulished
On Wed, Oct 20, 2010 at 08:49:35PM +0200, Andreas Oberritter wrote:
On 10/20/2010 08:25 PM, Denys Dmytriyenko wrote:
In OE we've been using this term for some time now. Although, still too
many
old recipes use old notations, sometimes even as generic as just plain
GPL
w/o specifying
On Wed, Oct 20, 2010 at 08:57:01PM +0200, Andreas Oberritter wrote:
On 10/20/2010 08:37 PM, Denys Dmytriyenko wrote:
On Wed, Oct 20, 2010 at 01:27:54PM -0500, Maupin, Chase wrote:
Chase,
Does it say what kind of exception it is? If it has a name, it's better to
specify it. For
] recipe licenses: update recipe LICENSE fields
On Wed, Oct 20, 2010 at 08:57:01PM +0200, Andreas Oberritter wrote:
On 10/20/2010 08:37 PM, Denys Dmytriyenko wrote:
On Wed, Oct 20, 2010 at 01:27:54PM -0500, Maupin, Chase wrote:
Chase,
Does it say what kind of exception it is? If it has
ping
-Original Message-
From: Chase Maupin [mailto:chasemaupi...@gmail.com]
Sent: Monday, October 11, 2010 10:58 AM
To: openembedded-devel@lists.openembedded.org
Cc: Maupin, Chase
Subject: [PATCHv2] recipe licenses: update recipe LICENSE fields
* While verifying the licensing for
* While verifying the licensing for the packages I am building
into my file system I found that for some packages the
LICENSE value set in the recipe was either incorrect or
generic and not detailed enough. This patch is my attempt
to update the LICENSE fields for these packages to match
2010/10/11 Chase Maupin chasemaupi...@gmail.com:
* While verifying the licensing for the packages I am building
into my file system I found that for some packages the
LICENSE value set in the recipe was either incorrect or
generic and not detailed enough. This patch is my attempt
to
] recipe licenses: update recipe LICENSE fields
2010/10/11 Chase Maupin chasemaupi...@gmail.com:
* While verifying the licensing for the packages I am building
into my file system I found that for some packages the
LICENSE value set in the recipe was either incorrect or
generic
12:41 PM
To: openembedded-devel@lists.openembedded.org
Subject: Re: [oe] [PATCHv2] recipe licenses: update recipe LICENSE fields
2010/10/11 Chase Maupin chasemaupi...@gmail.com:
* While verifying the licensing for the packages I am building
into my file system I found that for some packages
@lists.openembedded.org
Subject: Re: [oe] [PATCHv2] recipe licenses: update recipe LICENSE fields
2010/10/11 Chase Maupin chasemaupi...@gmail.com:
* While verifying the licensing for the packages I am building
into my file system I found that for some packages the
LICENSE value set in the recipe
Of
Frans Meulenbroeks
Sent: Monday, October 11, 2010 12:41 PM
To: openembedded-devel@lists.openembedded.org
Subject: Re: [oe] [PATCHv2] recipe licenses: update recipe LICENSE fields
2010/10/11 Chase Maupin chasemaupi...@gmail.com:
* While verifying the licensing for the packages I am building
I'm not sure if it is a policy. Haven't seen it being pulished as such.
Having said that, I have no problems with it (although there is no
problem with enforcing patents or so for v2+ , as that still falls
under the v2 umbrella).
I guess most of our recipes that say GPLv2 are wrong and
18 matches
Mail list logo
