Re: Relicensing Nautilus to GPLv3+

[Bastien Nocera <hadess hadess net>]

On Wed, 2017-05-17 at 09:45 -0500, Michael Catanzaro wrote:
> On Wed, May 17, 2017 at 9:20 AM, Bastien Nocera <hadess hadess net> 
> wrote:
> > If nautilus is GPLv3+, that means we can't link it against GPLv2-
> > only
> > or LGPLv2-only libraries in the extensions. I'm also not opening
> > the
> > can of worms that is non-GPL-compatible dependencies of extensions
> > (such as proprietary, or patent-encumbered GStreamer plugins),
> > because
> > that's an existing problem.
> >
> > What's the end goal for relicensing? What problems do the current
> > license cause that require a relicense?
> >
> > Cheers
>
> Sounds like the license is already GPLv3+, since it uses GPLv3+
> source 
> files, and the existing GPLv2+ notices are incorrect or misleading.

Were those licenses applied in error, or imported from projects that
were GPLv3 themselves?