Simon Josefsson <si...@josefsson.org> writes: > Andreas Metzler <ametz...@downhill.at.eu.org> writes: > >> On 2011-02-20 Simon Josefsson <si...@josefsson.org> wrote: >>> Andreas Metzler <ametz...@downhill.at.eu.org> writes: >> [...] >> >>> > I have the feeling that the discussion I started is an academic one >>> > anyway. Nettle's public key library (libhogweed) uses and links against >>> > libgmp, which is LGPLv3+. Therefore switching gnutls from gcrypt to >>> > nettle would break GPLv2-compatibility (GPLv2 without the "or any >>> > later version " clause). Oh dear. >> >>> It has been discussed to dual-license some libraries under >>> GPLv2+/LGPLv3+ to avoid this problem. I wonder if this could be a way >>> out here. GnuTLS 2.12 is not released (and there is not even any >>> release candidates), so we still have time to resolve this in a good >>> way. >> [...] >> >> Hello, >> Afaik there is nothing GnuTLS can do. It is using the most permissive >> license of the involved packages. The culprit is the combination of >> third party (L)GPL-v2only software (e.g. cups) with libgmp, which >> switched from LGPLv2+ to LGPLv3+ in 4.2.2. > > The FSF has clarified that to resolve that problem, it is recommended to > dual-license projects under GPLv2+/LGPLv3+ see: > > http://www.gnu.org/prep/maintain/maintain.html#Licensing-of-GNU-Packages > > So if GMP follows this suggestion, the problem would be resolved for > GPLv2-only projects. Did you really notice any LGPLv2-only projects > using GnuTLS when you looked?
I now realize that LGPLv2-only projects is not a problem since LGPLv2-only can be upgraded to GPLv2 which would then be GPLv2-compatible again. So let me rephrase the question: is there any project that happen to combine LGPLv2-only and GPLv2+-incompatible licensed code? Only such a project would be problematic even if GMP would become dual licensed under GPLv2+/LGPLv3+. If we can get any kind of metrics on the scale of this problem, we can think about whether it is a problem worth solving. /Simon -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-legal-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: http://lists.debian.org/87zkpq8n2s....@latte.josefsson.org
