On Wed, Jun 10, 2009 at 3:17 PM, Mike McGrath<mmcgrath@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > So without knowing it we started using AGPLv3 code in our environment > recently for fedora community and moksha. In the past I think all of our > stuff has been GPL(ish) mostly GPLv2 (toshio correct me if I'm wrong > there) > > I want to make sure we're all aware of what we can and can'd do as far as > mixing the code between the two as this could be very unfortunate. > > Luke, you described the AGPLv3 as "crucial". Can you let the rest of us > know why the GPLv2 wouldn't work? > > Toshio, also would you mind doing some grunt work and see what we've > comitted to with mixing code? > Ugh. I would assume Tom will be the best person to answer questions on mixing, but GPLv2 only and GPLv3 and AGPLv3 probably cannot mix. The old GPLv2 and above and GPLv3 should be OK, but I am not sure about that and AGPLv3. The AGPLv3 should mix with GPLv3 but I was frankly confused when I looked at it and me making assumptions would be worse than normal arm-chair lawyering :). My confusion is the following: Does anything AGPL need to have its code available for download as its patched and running? If thats the case we would want to make sure that it doesn't get mixed up with anything that contains passwords and such :). What kind of segregation would we need to do with patches? We probably will not be able to take working code from say GPLv2 code and put it in AGPLv3 code. [Actually what code could we do that with ? BSD? Apache? Smoogen Proprietary License v1 ?] None of the above is 'nightmare' stuff.. just more of making sure we don't screw someone down the road with mixed licenses and metaphors. -- Stephen J Smoogen. -- BSD/GNU/Linux How far that little candle throws his beams! So shines a good deed in a naughty world. = Shakespeare. "The Merchant of Venice" _______________________________________________ Fedora-infrastructure-list mailing list Fedora-infrastructure-list@xxxxxxxxxx https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-infrastructure-list
