Re: Brasero improvements over the 2.26 release cycle

Le vendredi 16 janvier 2009 à 14:06 +0100, Vincent Untz a écrit :
Le vendredi 16 janvier 2009, à 12:25 +0000, Luis Medinas a écrit :
> Right now Brasero is currently re-licensing the library again, we
> already contacted the people involved asking about the change. There
> were some bits in the library that Philippe re-wrote (that used NCB
> code) to be compatible with SJ and RB.



As Luis said I'm not against relicencing the library (and even the whole of brasero). It's just I wasn't aware of the issue at stake since I don't care much about licencing (which turns out to be a mistake).
Regarding libbrasero-media, it shouldn't take long as I wrote all of the code but the two backends for :
- FreeBSD but the copyright holder agreed to the licence change
- OpenSolaris and I'm waiting for the answer.
Given the size of the latter file, I can easily rewrite it if need be but I don't think it'll be necessary.

A few questions:
- is using the same licence and wording as rhythmbox OK?
- should brasero remain GPL v2 (just temporarily of course I need to check who sent patches and there were not that many unfortunately/fortunately your choice) while libbrasero-media is GPL v2 + exceptions would it be a problem? If not, should I simply add the new licence to libbrasero-media for the time there is this discrepancy between brasero and the library?
- One last thing, if I want to relicence brasero as a whole what about artwork (and translation, and documentation) that was submitted? Should I require the permission from the people who did this (great) work? Otherwise, I will of course at least warn the submitters.
- still if I wanted to relicence brasero as a whole, do I need to ask for the permission of the people who submitted patches fixing problems (crash, things not working properly in general, ...) ?

Thanks in advance.



[Date Prev][Date Next]   [Thread Prev][Thread Next]   [Thread Index] [Date Index] [Author Index]