Re: GPL2 (not 2+) license in checklicenses.py

[Joerg Mayer <jmayer () loplof de>]

On Fri, Oct 25, 2013 at 02:20:55PM -0400, Evan Huus wrote:
> I was just wondering why checklicenses.py does not permit any "GPL2"
> licenses, the only GPL-related ones on the list are GPL2+.

This may turn out to be an oversight of the original authors.
Have you asked them to change the license?
"BSD license" is also vague. *Which* BSD license? Our COPYING file
contains several (and none of them uses the term "BSD license").

> If there's a reason we require 2+ and not just 2 then we will have to
> add exceptions for epan/dissectors/packet-ieee80211-radiotap-iter.[ch]
> which are dual-licensed under GPL2 and BSD, but not under GPL2+.
> Otherwise we can just add GPL2 to the list of valid licenses.

I don't consider GPLv2(non-plus) to be a compatible license as it will
prevent whoever wants to link against a LGPv3 library to redistribute
the resulting binaries.

Ciao
       Jörg

-- 
Joerg Mayer                                           <jmayer () loplof de>
We are stuck with technology when what we really want is just stuff that
works. Some say that should read Microsoft instead of technology.
___________________________________________________________________________
Sent via:    Wireshark-dev mailing list <wireshark-dev () wireshark org>
Archives:    http://www.wireshark.org/lists/wireshark-dev
Unsubscribe: https://wireshark.org/mailman/options/wireshark-dev
             mailto:wireshark-dev-request () wireshark org?subject=unsubscribe