Re: Relicensing Nautilus to GPLv3+

[Carlos Soriano <csoriano protonmail com>]

Ah yes, my bad. For some reason my mind didn't accept the "GPL2-only is compatible with GPL2+". All clear now.

-------- Original Message --------

Subject: Re: Relicensing Nautilus to GPLv3+

Local Time: May 19, 2017 12:05 AM

UTC Time: May 18, 2017 10:05 PM

From: hadess hadess net

To: Carlos Soriano <csoriano protonmail com>

release-team gnome org <release-team gnome org>, nautilus-list gnome org <nautilus-list gnome org>, Emilio Pozuelo Monfort <pochu27 gmail com>, Frederic Crozat <fred crozat net>, desktop-devel-list gnome org <desktop-devel-list gnome org>

On Thu, 2017-05-18 at 15:47 -0400, Carlos Soriano wrote:

> Maybe I didn't explain well. Emilio points out there could one one of

> those extensions that say GPL2+ to link to a GPL2-only library. But

> that would make the extension itself GPL2 anyway, and it's License

> file would have to reflect that initially.

Again, it wouldn't. The combined work would be GPLv2-only, but each one

of the items keeps its own license. The licenses are compatible.

You don't have to have an piece of code depending on the exact same

version of the license if those licenses are compatible. GPLv2-only is

compatible with GPLv2+, as the license mentions for that dependency

says:

"either version 2 of the License, or (at your option) any later

version."

The selection is "made" automatically when you run those 2 items in the

same memory address space (eg. when you "link" them).

> It's just a hipotetical case, I checked the extensions dependencies

> in a quick look and look fine (>= GPL+2).

--

nautilus-list mailing list

nautilus-list gnome org

https://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/nautilus-list