Re: relicensing libunistring to "dual LGPLv3+ or GPLv2"

Bruno Haible wrote: Paul, please cry loudly if you disagree :) No, that's fine, thanks. (Sorry, I thought I already replied to this.)

Re: relicensing libunistring to "dual LGPLv3+ or GPLv2"

People reminded me about this license change: > The other files were written by: > lib/fseterr.h: Bruno > lib/fseterr.c: Bruno, Kevin Cernekee > lib/mbchar.h: Bruno, Paul (regarding 'inline') > lib/mbchar.c: Bruno, Paul (regarding 'inline') > lib/mbiter.h: Bruno, Paul > lib/mbiter.c: P

Re: relicensing libunistring to "dual LGPLv3+ or GPLv2"

On Mon, Nov 21, 2016 at 10:46 AM, Bruno Haible wrote: > I would be willing to put my contributions to these files under LGPLv2+. [...] > === Kevin === > > Would you be willing to do the same for lib/fseterr.c ? Yes, approved.

Re: relicensing libunistring to "dual LGPLv3+ or GPLv2"

Daiki Ueno wrote: > noticed some more dependencies (from the unistdio modules): > > /home/dueno/devel/libunistring/../gnulib/gnulib-tool: *** incompatible > license on modules: > fseterr LGPL > mbchar

Re: relicensing libunistring to "dual LGPLv3+ or GPLv2"

Paolo Bonzini wrote: > LGPLv2+ is fine for any gnulib module I wrote. Thank you, Paolo. With all approvals complete, I pushed the relicensing changes. Bruno -- In memoriam Kerem Yılmazer

Re: relicensing libunistring to "dual LGPLv3+ or GPLv2"

On 19/11/2016 11:26, Bruno Haible wrote: > Hi Paolo, > > For the 'frexpl-nolibm' module I also need your approval, since you > contributed lib/frexpl.c on 2003-02-18. > > Would you agree to relicense your initial lib/frexpl.c > under 'LGPLv3+ or GPLv2'? > Or possibly even under LGPLv2+? > > If

Re: relicensing libunistring to "dual LGPLv3+ or GPLv2"

Hi Paolo, For the 'frexpl-nolibm' module I also need your approval, since you contributed lib/frexpl.c on 2003-02-18. Would you agree to relicense your initial lib/frexpl.c under 'LGPLv3+ or GPLv2'? Or possibly even under LGPLv2+? If you don't voice an objection within a week, I'll assume you ag

Re: relicensing libunistring to "dual LGPLv3+ or GPLv2"

Hi Paolo, For the 'frexpl-nolibm' module I also need your approval, since you contributed lib/frexpl.c on 2003-02-18. Would you agree to relicense your initial lib/frexpl.c under 'LGPLv3+ or GPLv2'? Or possibly even under LGPLv2+? Bruno > It has been decided that libunistring is going to be rel

Re: relicensing libunistring to "dual LGPLv3+ or GPLv2"

On 11/11/2016 07:44 PM, Bruno Haible wrote: > Hi, > > It has been decided that libunistring is going to be relicensed under > "dual LGPLv3+ or GPLv2" license. See > http://lists.gnu.org/archive/html/bug-libunistring/2016-11/msg3.html > > To this effect, the libunistring modules in gnulib that

Re: relicensing libunistring to "dual LGPLv3+ or GPLv2"

Hi Bruno, Bruno Haible skribis: > === Paul, Eric, Ludovic, === > > Would you agree to relicense your changes to lib/isnan.c > under 'LGPLv3+ or GPLv2'? > Or possibly even under LGPLv2+? Yes, sure. Ludo’.

Re: relicensing libunistring to "dual LGPLv3+ or GPLv2"

On 11/11/2016 05:44 PM, Bruno Haible wrote: Would you agree to relicense your changes to lib/isnan.c under 'LGPLv3+ or GPLv2'? Or possibly even under LGPLv2+? Yes, that's fine with me.