* Joerg Schilling <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > First, libcdio had an illegal license change: the "authors" took a lot of the > code from cdrtools and claim that "their" code (e.g. derived from cdda2wav) > is > GPLv2-or-any-later. Well, not a single file from cdda2wav has ever been > released > under this license.
Ah, then you as the original author (right ?) to stop them from that copyright infringenment. In the end they, IMHO, have two options: a) remove/replace your code b) release libcdio under your terms (CDDL ?) If they choose b), what consequences does it have for importing packages ? Is, eg., GPL'ed code allowed to import this lib ? If yes, then I don't see a major problem, besides that bundling of that lib isn't allowed anymore (hah, I'd like to see that folks like Rich Felker thing about this ;-P). > If you run sound-juicer, then gstreamer (being LGPL) loads and calls libcdio > which is GPL. This is not allowed by the GPL. GPL and LGPL are incompatible. ACK. That's one of those points why I thing, libraries should LGPL instead of GPL (I admit, I'm as careful as I should be about that w/ some of my own packages yet, but just due lack of time - on request my GPL'ed libs will be moved to LGPL) > While the GPL is asymmetric and allows GPL code to call code under any > license, > GPLd code is not allowed to be called from non-GPL code. Yep, that's the "viral effect". I, personally like this concept, but everybody should decide for his own. BUT: please, please no flamewar about license philosophies. cu -- --------------------------------------------------------------------- Enrico Weigelt == metux IT service - http://www.metux.de/ --------------------------------------------------------------------- Please visit the OpenSource QM Taskforce: http://wiki.metux.de/public/OpenSource_QM_Taskforce Patches / Fixes for a lot dozens of packages in dozens of versions: http://patches.metux.de/ --------------------------------------------------------------------- -- gentoo-user@lists.gentoo.org mailing list
