On Thu, 30 Dec 2010 at 17:41:28 -0600, eviljoel wrote:
> ioquake3 is explicitly licensed as GPLv2. Thus, the clause you
> mentioned does not apply.
Really? I picked a few random files (cl_main.c, qal.c, sv_snapshot.c,
ui_shared.c, be_aas_reach.c) and they all seem to be marked as GPLv2+, i.e.
GPLv2 with the "any later version" clause.
If this is the case for the whole engine, then Zack is free to use the Q3
source files under GPLv3, but any modules where Q3 and WolfET-derived code
have been combined will have to be GPLv3 (or perhaps GPLv3+, if WolfET's
license allows that).
GPLv2+ is like a dual license, except that instead of just a pair of licenses
(MPL/GPL like Mozilla, for instance), it lets you choose GPLv2, GPLv3, any
(as yet hypothetical) future GPLv4, and so on.
If Zack wants to let developers who insist on GPLv2 re-use modules from his
engine, one way to do it would be to isolate WolfET-derived code into
particular files, so all the other files can remain GPLv2+; another way
would be to commit bugfixes/new features that don't require the WolfET code
into a purely GPLv2+ project or branch.
>From my point of view that GPLv2+ project would ideally be ioquake3 itself,
although that relies on ioquake3 committers reviewing and merging things.
Talking of which, I have several patches from Debian's version of ioquake3
awaiting review in the ioquake3 bugzilla, if anyone feels like reviewing
things :-)
Regards,
smcv
_______________________________________________
ioquake3 mailing list
ioquake3@lists.ioquake.org
http://lists.ioquake.org/listinfo.cgi/ioquake3-ioquake.org
By sending this message I agree to love ioquake3 and libsdl.
