On Wed, Jun 28, 2006 at 01:12:10PM +1000, Craig Small wrote: > On Wed, Jun 28, 2006 at 11:02:01AM +0900, Charles Plessy wrote: > > It appears that, although the COPYING file and the website > > claim that TreeView X is GPL, all the source files have Library GPL > > headers (except the Nexus ones of course). Technically, what is the > > licence of TreeView X? LGPL, or GPL? > Both or neither, anyhow its a problem.
No, it's not. The LGPL specifies that the user may redistribute the software under the LGPL, or the GPL. So you (as packager) can simply choose to do your redistribution under the terms of the GPL. It's a good idea to mention this in the copyright file, of course. > I would email the upstream author and ask them that you can see both > licenses and which one is he/she/they using? Clarification is always good, but there is no legal problem here. If it's GPL, you may distribute it as such, if it's LGPL, you may distribute it as GPL as well. Thanks, Bas -- I encourage people to send encrypted e-mail (see http://www.gnupg.org). If you have problems reading my e-mail, use a better reader. Please send the central message of e-mails as plain text in the message body, not as HTML and definitely not as MS Word. Please do not use the MS Word format for attachments either. For more information, see http://129.125.47.90/e-mail.html
signature.asc
Description: Digital signature
