Re: apache2 and gpl2+
Hi,
Quoting Riley Baird (2014-08-31 23:02:57)
> > As it is pointed out here [5] and here [6], GPL2 is incompatible with Apache2
> > but GPL3 projects can contain Apache2 licensed code. Since vcmi is licensed
> > GPL2+, could the Debian package upgrade the license to GPL3+ and thus turn it
> > into a GPL3 project with Apache2 code which should be compatible? Sorry if this
> > is stupid, it's just a naive idea.
>
> Yes, you certainly could do that!
I see.
Are there other examples in the archive where this is done?
What would I put into debian/copyright? GPL2+ (which is what upstream uses but
is unredistributable) or GPL3+?
> > The last possible solution I see would be to make the embedded fuzzylite
> > version of vcmi into a shared library that vcmi can then link against. If
> > it is a shared library and not statically compiled into vcmi, does it make
> > a difference in terms of license compatibility? Or is even linking of
> > apache2 code from gpl2+ code forbidden?
>
> I'm not sure, but I'd say that this would permitted if you released vcmi
> as a whole under GPL-3(+), but it would be forbidden if you choose GPL-2
> only.
I see, thanks!
> By the way, would it be possible to link to the present version of fuzzylite,
> instead of the provided copy? Debian policy 4.13
> (https://www.debian.org/doc/debian-policy/ch-source.html) does not allow
> convenience copies.
It would be hard to do that because upstream uses a two year old version of
fuzzylite with their own patches on top. Fuzzylite itself is not in Debian and
does not seem to be embedded in any other source package according to
codesearch.
So there would be a tradeoff between
- letting vcmi ship its convenience copy of outdated fuzzylite and
- putting an outdated and patched fuzzylite package into Debian.
Neither of those solutions seems optimal.
It would of course be best if upstream could switch to the current version of
fuzzylite but according to them that would mean to rewrite big parts of their
code because fuzzylite added/removed/changed much functionality with their
recent version 5.0.
Thanks a lot for your input!
cheers, josch
Reply to: