On 6/4/07, kaimmello <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > Relicensing code is difficult unless you have copyright assignment > > (which SAGE doesn't) or you are a "young" project with contact to all > > (significant) contributers. > > > > If I remember well, somewhere William Stein asked the contributors to > put him as a co-owner of the copyright, it was to solve license issues > like this? > Anyway SAGE is a quite young project and because the step from GPLv2 > to GPLv3 is an important one, I think this license matter should be > evaluated....
Because GPLv3 is not compatible with GPLv2, I am concerned that the GPLv3 is going to be difficult for the open source community and also for SAGE. That said, I am simply going to wait at least six months until after GPLv3 officially starts getting used, and at that point discuss what to do, probably following whatever Debian does. I don't think there is any reason to hurry. Some of the code contributed to SAGE is copyright by the original contributors -- there is no requirement that I also own the copyright before I will accept code. Thus already relicensing even the SAGE library under GPL v3 (or even GPL v2 or later) could be difficult. Moreover, every single GPLv2'd program that SAGE depends on that is only licensed under GPLv2 (e.g., PARI) would first have to be relicensed under GPLv3 (or GPLv2 or later) since combining a GPLv2 program with a GPLv3 program violates the GPLv2. Already with PARI this could be very difficult. So I think we should simply wait and see what happens with other projects, and only then worry about what to do with SAGE. William --~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~ To post to this group, send email to sage-devel@googlegroups.com To unsubscribe from this group, send email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/sage-devel URLs: http://sage.scipy.org/sage/ and http://modular.math.washington.edu/sage/ -~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---
