>> Changing package names is probably harmless. But file headers and
>> copyright notices should not be changed until after IP transfer
>> (repository migration).
The license header was changed before this discussion (19 days ago). The
LICENSE.header file contained an outdated copyright notice (
On Fri, Oct 21, 2022 at 3:19 AM Bertil Chapuis wrote:
>
>
> >> Changing package names is probably harmless. But file headers and
> >> copyright notices should not be changed until after IP transfer
> >> (repository migration).
>
> The license header was changed before this discussion (19 days ago)
>> In terms of license, all the LGPL dependencies have been replaced last
>> summer. My main concern is related to the osmpbf data format. The protobuf
>> descriptor used by this format is released under the terms of the GNU Lesser
>> General Public License. In my understanding this file should
Le 21/10/2022 à 13:19, Bertil Chapuis a écrit :
(…snip…) You are right, apparently the output of a generator inherits
the license of the template. (…snip…) George and Martin, do you have
experience with this kind of issues and on how to address it?
In my understanding of [1], the GPL-derived w
After spending some time
> On 21 Oct 2022, at 16:37, Martin Desruisseaux
> wrote:
>
> Le 21/10/2022 à 13:19, Bertil Chapuis a écrit :
>> (…snip…) You are right, apparently the output of a generator inherits the
>> license of the template. (…snip…) George and Martin, do you have experience
>>
Regarding the GPL/LGPL dependencies. It is true that an ASF top-level project
cannot make releases with those dependencies. But these issues can be solved
during incubation. Incubating projects have some leeway while making their
first releases. I suggest that you do not try to solve the GPL/LGP
