On Mon, Jul 18 2022, Abhradeep Chakraborty wrote: > On Mon, Jul 18, 2022 at 4:43 PM Jakub Narębski <jnareb@xxxxxxxxx> wrote: >> >> Abhradeep Chakraborty <chakrabortyabhradeep79@xxxxxxxxx> writes: >> >> > Hello, >> > >> > I need the CRoaring[1] library to use roaring bitmaps. But it has >> > Apache license v2 which is not compatible with GPLv2[2]. >> >> Actually Apache License v2.0 *is* compatibile with GPLv2 and GPLv3 >> in the sense that you can include the Apache licensed code (like the >> CRoaring library) in the GPLv2 project (like Git). >> >> Quote from the cited "Apache License V2.0 and GPL Compatibility"[2]: >> >> The Free Software Foundation considers the Apache License, Version 2.0 >> to be a free software license, compatible with version 3 of the GPL. >> The Software Freedom Law Center provides practical advice for >> developers about including permissively licensed source. >> >> Apache 2 software can therefore be included in GPLv3 projects, because >> the GPLv3 license accepts our software into GPLv3 works. However, >> GPLv3 software cannot be included in Apache projects. The licenses are >> incompatible in one direction only, and it is a result of ASF's >> licensing philosophy and the GPLv3 authors' interpretation of >> copyright law. > > But the same article also says - > > Despite our best efforts, the FSF has never considered the Apache License > to be compatible with GPL version 2, citing the patent termination > and indemnification > provisions as restrictions not present in the older GPL license. The > Apache Software > Foundation believes that you should always try to obey the > constraints expressed by > the copyright holder when redistributing their work. ...indeed, and for those that don't remember around the time the GPLv3 was being discussed & eventually released having it be compatible with the Apache license was a major thing that the Apache Foundation and FSF worked towards. But we use GPLv2 only, which as you note is explicitly known to be incompatible with Apache v2.0.
