Re: [Evolution-hackers] Copyright of Camel's individual source files

[Philip Van Hoof <spam pvanhoof be>]

On Tue, 2007-10-09 at 10:48 -0400, Jeffrey Stedfast wrote:
> It was supposed to be GPLv2 or LGPLv2 (forget which), but without the
> "or later" clause.

For what it's worth, it would be more easy for projects like OpenChange
and Tinymail if the work would either be dual licensed as LGPL v2 and
LGPL v3 or with the "or later" clause.

The problem would be that otherwise if the authors of these libraries
would want to move their work to a newer version of the LGPL license,
Camel's license might turn out to be incompatible with this.

Which is something to avoid, I think.


> On Tue, 2007-10-09 at 16:19 +0530, Srinivasa Ragavan wrote:
> > Philip,
> > 
> > This is observed in Evolution also. The OpenChange hackers brought to
> > our notice and I'm with the Novell legal team to get this resolved
> > altogether. But that process seems like taking time and I have to wait a
> > but before doing anything.
> > 
> > -Srini.
> > 
> > On Mon, 2007-10-08 at 12:08 +0200, Philip Van Hoof wrote:
> > > Hi there,
> > > 
> > > The README.COPYRIGHT of EDS's Camel states:
> > > 
> > >  * This program is free software; you can redistribute it and/or 
> > >  * modify it under the terms of the GNU General Public License as 
> > >  * published by the Free Software Foundation; either version 2 of the
> > >  * License, or (at your option) any later version.
> > > 
> > > Whereas a lot of files (like, camel-address.c, to pick one example) state:
> > > 
> > >  * This program is free software; you can redistribute it and/or
> > >  * modify it under the terms of version 2 of the GNU Lesser General Public
> > >  * License as published by the Free Software Foundation.
> > > 
> > > It looks like EDS's COPYING file also uses the "any later version"
> > > version of the GPL v2.
> > > 
> > > I'm not sure whether it's a good idea to have mixed licenses for one
> > > piece of code (being Camel). Would it be possible to change the license
> > > of all of EDS's files to be the same?
> > > 
> > > Note that Novell/Ximian seems to be the copyright holder of all files,
> > > that of course means this organisation makes this decision.
> > > 
> > > 
> > > Thanks!
> > > 
> > 
> > _______________________________________________
> > Evolution-hackers mailing list
> > Evolution-hackers gnome org
> > http://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/evolution-hackers
> 
> _______________________________________________
> Evolution-hackers mailing list
> Evolution-hackers gnome org
> http://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/evolution-hackers
-- 
Philip Van Hoof, software developer
home: me at pvanhoof dot be 
gnome: pvanhoof at gnome dot org 
http://www.pvanhoof.be/blog