Re: GPL Compatibility of IFRIT License

[Nathanael Nerode <neroden@twcny.rr.com>]

Mark Hymers wrote:
> A wdiff between this and the VTK license shows that just the names of
> the contributors have been changed (as you'd expect).  It appears to be
> a modified BSD license (i.e. without advertising clause) with one extra
> clause:
> 
>  * Modified source versions must be plainly marked as such, and must not
>  be
>    misrepresented as being the original software.
> 
> My question is about linking this against GPL code (in this case, QT).
> I think this is probably ok but my only point of reference for this is
> that the zlib license (which the FSF describe as being GPL compatible -
> http://www.gnu.org/licenses/license-list.html) contains the following
> clause:
> 
> 2. Altered source versions must be plainly marked as such, and must
>    not be misrepresented as being the original software.
> 
> Basically, I just want to check before sorting out the remaining small
> issues with upstream and continuing with the package that the consensus
> of opinion here is that this is all ok and correct.

Yes, that clause is fine and GPL compatible.

-- 
This space intentionally left blank.