Re: External Dependency Proposal: libappindicator


Am Fri, 19 Feb 2010 09:18:10 -0600
schrieb Cody Russell <bratsche gnome org>:
> On Fri, 2010-02-19 at 14:16 +0100, Christian Persch wrote:
> > Also, why is this LGPL 2&3-only instead of the usual LGPL
> > 2.1-or-later?
> Because seriously, everything should be this way.  None of us should
> be saying "LGPL 2.1 or later".  Ask a lawyer, even one from the FSF,
> how much sense it makes to license your software that way.

Really? The FSF *recommends* that you add the "or later" clause; see
e.g. [1].

And if you are concerned about what the later [L]GPL version will say,
you should at least keep open the possibility to use it, by designating
a trusted proxy to make the licence upgrade decision, like KDE does by
deferring this to the KDE eV membership in their licensing policy[2].
You definitly don't need copyright assignment for this. IMHO Gnome
ought to have a similar policy here.



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