On 06/25/2013 01:49 PM, Arun Raghavan wrote: > On Tue, 2013-06-25 at 08:57 +0200, David Henningsson wrote: >> Hmm, are there optional dependencies to libdbus that cause it to become >> GPL, or why would anyone choose GPL for libdbus? > > I believe some folks don't like the Academic Free License. This might > explain the reasons: > > https://www.gnu.org/licenses/license-list.html#AcademicFreeLicense > (which links to https://www.gnu.org/licenses/license-list.html#OSL ) Hmm. So the AFL is GPL incompatible, but compatible with about everything else. So if you have something GPL, libdbus turns GPL, otherwise you'll use it as AFL. So in practice, there isn't a problem here. I think a small notice that "libdbus is dual-licensed under Academic Free License and GPL" is enough, then. >> Also "demoted to GPL" sounds like we have an opinion about GPL (it sound >> like we think LGPL being of a higher rank than GPL). > > In terms of restrictions, LGPL is less-restrictive, so I think that > should stand as an objective assessment. :) But in terms of copyleft, it's the opposite. -- David Henningsson, Canonical Ltd. https://launchpad.net/~diwic
