Re: Uniformity - licenses

[Christian Persch <chpe gnome org>]

Hi;

Am Sun, 24 Oct 2010 23:19:06 +0200
schrieb "Thomas H.P. Andersen" <phomes gmail com>:
> >> No preferences here either but we would need to get approval from
> >> all people whom have copyright claims in our code. That turns out
> >> to be quite a few people.
> >
> > That's a bit of a problem, yes. I had assumed that all .h/.c/.cpp
> > files in gnome-games had a proper GPL copyright header with the "or
> > later" clause (which permits moving from GPL2+ to GPL3+), but now
> > that I've looked it turns out that a lot of the games (at least
> > mahjongg, gtali, gnobots, and gnect (for the velena engine)) don't
> > have that. So this probably makes the proposed move to GPL3+
> > impossible for these games.
> 
> We could ask the authors for those games or do vala-rewrites (if we
> choose to port some c-games to vala). For velena I think that we need
> to find an easier ai anyway.

We could, yes. However, there's a difference between a no-effort GPL2+
to GPL3+ move where the authors already agreed by choosing the "+" in
the first place, and a long-winded real relicensing, esp. since
there's no real benefit here, other than a bit of 'uniformity'. So,
IMHO, we can move those games that are unambigously GPL2+ to GPL3+, and
just keep the other ones as-is. For new games, or rewrites /from
scratch/, we can of course just choose 3+ right from the start.

Regards,
	Christian