On 04.03.15 12:48, Werner Koch wrote: >> that doesn't tell you about proprietary projects that have chosen not to >> > use GPGME. I've had clients refuse to use GPGME because of the >> > licensing, even under the LGPLv2.1. (Foolish, I know.) Other times > And I have had several hints that it was used anyway and violating the > license. But that is another story. > > If there is a compelling reason to change the license, like to increase > the adaption of mail encryption, I am willing to consider that. I am > able do that for most of the code but there are some practical > drawbacks, like the ability to share code between the other libraries. >
I'd rather not have a license changed off copyleft. -- Ville
signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature
_______________________________________________ Gnupg-users mailing list Gnupg-users@gnupg.org http://lists.gnupg.org/mailman/listinfo/gnupg-users
