On Mon, 2012-11-26 at 20:13 +0000, Andrew Haley wrote: > On 11/26/2012 06:29 PM, Debarshi Ray wrote: > >>>> Why does it matter? Their code hasn't changed, and has not become GPLv3. The package is GPLv3+. If the license of libraw changed significantly, the libraw package should be updated to reflect the true license of the combined work. In this case, it's the package maintainer that added the flags: --enable-demosaic-pack-gpl2 --enable-demosaic-pack-gpl3 If you want to keep shotwell with the same "combined work" license, either revert those changes, or get a version of LibRaw without demosaic compiled-in packaged. > >>> It matters because Shotwell links to GStreamer. > >>> > >>> GStreamer applications either opt for LGPLv2+ or GPLv2+ with > exceptions because they might end up using proprietary or otherwise > unfavourably licensed GStreamer plugins . > >> > >> Which is fine, because GPLv3+ is compatible with LGPLv2+ or GPLv2+. > > > > You missed the "proprietary or otherwise unfavourably licensed" > part. :-) There are proprietary GStreamer plugins for patent > encumbered formats. eg., the MP3 codecs from Fluendo. > > > > Granted that Fedora does not ship such GStreamer plugins, but some > of our downstreams do. (I don't think I am allowed to get into > specifics here.) > > OK, so there are some proprietary or otherwise encumbered plugins > that might not be GPLv3-compatible but might be compatible with GPLv2. No, they would be compatible with the LGPLv2, or with a GPLv2 + exception. > And you're worried that some unwitting user might by mistake break > the terms of a licence. Or, perhaps, some downstream might not be > able to ship a plugin because they fear it's not allowed. > > > Plus, this practice of either using LGPLv2+ or GPLv2+ with > exceptions for applications is so widespread in GStreamer land (Totem, > PiTiVi, Rhythmbox, Transmageddon, etc.) that I was not comfortable > with having a situation where the application silently ends up under a > different license due to another library. > > I don't think that's a problem because the whole purpose of the > "or any later version of the GPL, at your choice" is to allow > the GPL to be updated. It's (LGPLv2+) and (GPLv2+ with exception) that's compatible with proprietary plugins. Naked GPL isn't. -- devel mailing list devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel
