[Help-gnutls] Re: Using LGPLv3+ license for libgnutls?

[Simon Josefsson]

Alex Hudson <address@hidden> writes:

> Hi Simon,
>
> Simon Josefsson wrote:
>> RMS asked if there are is reason GnuTLS should remain LGPLv2.1+ instead
>> of using LGPLv3+.
>>
>> The reasons I'm familiar with includes lynx under GPLv2-only.  Gnucash
>> is also said to contain GPLv2-only code.
>>
>> Are there other reasons not to use LGPLv3+?
>>   
>
> There are a number of applications out there that are GPLv2-only,
> including the project I work on
> (http://www.bongo-project.org/). OpenSSL isn't available for those who
> can't relicense their projects, so not having GnuTLS be available
> would be a big blow.

Thanks for the information.  If you know of more GPLv2-only projects
that use GnuTLS, that would be useful to know.

Btw, Bongo looks relatively new, could you share any insight why you
chose a GPLv2-only license?  It looks bound to create problems sooner or
later.

>> I recall hearing about policies that mandate LGPLv2.1+ in some projects,
>> for example the core libraries in GNOME, but I cannot find any reference
>> to this out there.  Anyone?
>>   
>
> IIRC, Gtk+ hackers have talked about moving to LGPLv3, but nothing has
> actually been agreed.

Ok.  So maybe they actually don't have a LGPLv2.1+ policy.

Thanks,
Simon