Hi Eric,
> > Module Source file Contributors
> > -- ---
> >
> > chown lib/chown.c Eric Blake
> >
> > lchown lib/lchown.cEric Blake
> >
> > openlib/open.c
On 08/10/2010 08:48 AM, Jim Meyering wrote:
> David Lutterkort wrote:
>
>> On Thu, 2010-07-29 at 22:35 +0200, Bruno Haible wrote:
>>> Adam Stokes wrote:
Is it possible to change these modules licenses to LGPLv2+?
> ...
>> Don't forget Jim, who is cited as the original author of chown and
>> l
On 07/29/2010 02:35 PM, Bruno Haible wrote:
> Adam Stokes wrote:
>> Is it possible to change these modules licenses to LGPLv2+?
>
> Have you considered releasing your library under LGPLv3+?
>
> For your request, the following contributors since 2007-10-07
> would have to agree:
>
> Module
David Lutterkort wrote:
> On Thu, 2010-07-29 at 22:35 +0200, Bruno Haible wrote:
>> Adam Stokes wrote:
>> > Is it possible to change these modules licenses to LGPLv2+?
...
> Don't forget Jim, who is cited as the original author of chown and
> lchown in the source.
Relaxing that one to lgplv2+ is
On 07/29/2010 04:47 PM, David Lutterkort wrote:
> On Thu, 2010-07-29 at 15:46 -0600, Eric Blake wrote:
>> On 07/29/2010 03:42 PM, David Lutterkort wrote:
For your request, the following contributors since 2007-10-07
would have to agree:
>>>
>>> Don't forget Jim, who is cited as the o
On Thu, 2010-07-29 at 15:46 -0600, Eric Blake wrote:
> On 07/29/2010 03:42 PM, David Lutterkort wrote:
> >>
> >> For your request, the following contributors since 2007-10-07
> >> would have to agree:
> >
> > Don't forget Jim, who is cited as the original author of chown and
> > lchown in the sour
David Lutterkort wrote:
> > Is it possible to change these modules licenses to LGPLv2+?
> > Have you considered releasing your library under LGPLv3+?
>
> Adam is asking because he's working on porting augeas[1] to mingw;
> relicensing augeas under LGPLv3+ is not really an option, since most of
> i
David Lutterkort wrote:
> Don't forget Jim, who is cited as the original author of chown and
> lchown in the source.
Yes, you're right. We need Jim's agreement for lib/chown.c and lib/lchown.c,
since before 2007-10-07, these files were under GPLv2+, not LGPLv2+.
My mistake, sorry. I'm glad you ca
On 07/29/2010 03:42 PM, David Lutterkort wrote:
>>
>> For your request, the following contributors since 2007-10-07
>> would have to agree:
>
> Don't forget Jim, who is cited as the original author of chown and
> lchown in the source.
Anything changes made before 2007, including original content,
On 07/29/2010 02:35 PM, Bruno Haible wrote:
> Adam Stokes wrote:
>> Is it possible to change these modules licenses to LGPLv2+?
>
> Have you considered releasing your library under LGPLv3+?
>
> For your request, the following contributors since 2007-10-07
> would have to agree:
>
> Module
On Thu, 2010-07-29 at 22:35 +0200, Bruno Haible wrote:
> Adam Stokes wrote:
> > Is it possible to change these modules licenses to LGPLv2+?
>
> Have you considered releasing your library under LGPLv3+?
>
> For your request, the following contributors since 2007-10-07
> would have to agree:
>
>
Adam Stokes wrote:
> Is it possible to change these modules licenses to LGPLv2+?
Have you considered releasing your library under LGPLv3+?
For your request, the following contributors since 2007-10-07
would have to agree:
Module Source file Contributors
--
Is it possible to change these modules licenses to LGPLv2+?
Thank you
-Adam
13 matches
Mail list logo
