Re: libidn re-license
On 07/03/12 09:01, Simon Josefsson wrote:
> I co-maintain the libidn package. As upstream, I recently relicensed it
> from LGPLv2+ to GPLv2+|LGPLv3+.
This effectively means: recipients of the new libidn may choose any
license which they could choose for the old libidn, except for the
LGPLv2 and LGPLv2.1.
Is there a particular reason why you want to deny permission to use your
library under those specific licenses? Is there something they allow
that you want to forbid? If not, I'm not sure that I see why you'd want
to change it... particularly if you have to get into dual-licensing. I
can see advantages of the LGPLv3 over the LGPLv2 from a clarity point of
view (it's just the GPLv3 with exceptions, whereas the LGPLv2 and v2.1
are separate licenses with explicit provision to relicense to the
GPLv2), but an explicit dual-license seems as though it defeats that
clarity.
Obviously, it's your choice as copyright holder, but I can't say I'm
entirely happy about libraries getting a more restrictive license in
newer versions; I feel as though the general principle of
backwards-compatible API (everything that used to work should still
work) applies just as much to licensing. Hopefully nobody's going to end
up forking an older version as libidn-lgpl2 or something...
S
Reply to: