Difference between revisions of "Licensing"
(→Step 1: Contacting the authors) |
(→Step 1: Contacting the authors) |
||
| Line 1: | Line 1: | ||
| − | == | + | == Ethersex Relicensing Effort == |
| + | |||
| + | === Why does it matter? === | ||
| + | |||
| + | Ethersex is licensed unter GPLv3, but a few parts are currently licensed as GPLv2 only or as BSD. However, we still need to validate with the individual copyright holders that a relicense to GPLv2+ or GPLv2+v3 is okay with them. | ||
| + | |||
| + | Therefore, in an effort we're trying to identify the contributors that have contributed under the terms of GPLv2 and where the "+" part was not explicitly mentioned or BSD. If we know that all contributors agreed to a relicense, we can go ahead and flip the license of the individual source file. | ||
| + | |||
| + | == How can I help? == | ||
| + | |||
| + | By identifying a contributor who as contributed under the terms of GPLv2 or BSD, and contacting him if he wasn't already contacted. Ask him the following questions: | ||
| + | |||
| + | * Are you okay with relicensing your contributions done under "GPLv2" to "GPLv2 or later"? | ||
| + | |||
| + | * Are you okay with relicensing your contributions done under "GPLv2" to "GPLv2 or GPLv3" ? | ||
| + | |||
| + | * Are you okay with relicensing your contributions done under "LGPLv2" to "LGPLv2 or later"? | ||
| + | |||
| + | * Are you okay with relicensing your contributions done under "LGPLv2" to "LGPLv2 or LGPLv3"? | ||
| + | |||
| + | * Are you okay with relicensing your contributions done under "BSD" to "GPLv3"? | ||
| + | |||
| + | * Are you okay with the Ethersex maintainer deciding on a future licensing change to your code, should that be necessary? | ||
| + | |||
| + | === What's next? === | ||
| + | |||
| + | # you the following script | ||
<source lang="bash"> | <source lang="bash"> | ||
| Line 8: | Line 34: | ||
</source> | </source> | ||
| + | # you interpret the result. check each commit that is being complained about carefully. Try to get the copyright's holder's permission. If you get it, update the whitelist in the script. | ||
| + | # review the list of declared copyright holders in the file. | ||
| + | # if you're all clear, change the license to the most liberal license possible. Document your change verbosely in the git commit log. | ||
| + | |||
| + | == Current Reply List == | ||
| + | |||
| + | * Please keep the list sorted by family name! | ||
| + | * Please only use "YES" or "NO" | ||
| + | {| border="1" | ||
| + | ! Name !! GPLv2->GPLv2+ !! LGPLv2 -> LGPLv2+ !! GPLv2 -> GPLv2+v3 !! LGPLv2 -> LGPLv2+LGPLv3 !! BSD -> GPLv3 || Ethersex decides | ||
| + | |- | ||
| + | |Kunze, Erik || YES || YES || YES || YES || YES || NO | ||
| + | |- | ||
| + | |} | ||
| − | + | == Current TODO List == | |
| − | + | == Relicensing progress == | |
Revision as of 11:34, 25 October 2011
Contents
Ethersex Relicensing Effort
Why does it matter?
Ethersex is licensed unter GPLv3, but a few parts are currently licensed as GPLv2 only or as BSD. However, we still need to validate with the individual copyright holders that a relicense to GPLv2+ or GPLv2+v3 is okay with them.
Therefore, in an effort we're trying to identify the contributors that have contributed under the terms of GPLv2 and where the "+" part was not explicitly mentioned or BSD. If we know that all contributors agreed to a relicense, we can go ahead and flip the license of the individual source file.
How can I help?
By identifying a contributor who as contributed under the terms of GPLv2 or BSD, and contacting him if he wasn't already contacted. Ask him the following questions:
- Are you okay with relicensing your contributions done under "GPLv2" to "GPLv2 or later"?
- Are you okay with relicensing your contributions done under "GPLv2" to "GPLv2 or GPLv3" ?
- Are you okay with relicensing your contributions done under "LGPLv2" to "LGPLv2 or later"?
- Are you okay with relicensing your contributions done under "LGPLv2" to "LGPLv2 or LGPLv3"?
- Are you okay with relicensing your contributions done under "BSD" to "GPLv3"?
- Are you okay with the Ethersex maintainer deciding on a future licensing change to your code, should that be necessary?
What's next?
- you the following script
cd ethersex
git shortlog -e -s > gitcommits
egrep -I -h -r -o "([a-zA-Z0-9_\.\-\+])+\@(([a-zA-Z0-9\-])+\.)+([a-zA-Z0-9]{2,4})" * | sort -u
rm gitcommits- you interpret the result. check each commit that is being complained about carefully. Try to get the copyright's holder's permission. If you get it, update the whitelist in the script.
- review the list of declared copyright holders in the file.
- if you're all clear, change the license to the most liberal license possible. Document your change verbosely in the git commit log.
Current Reply List
- Please keep the list sorted by family name!
- Please only use "YES" or "NO"
| Name | GPLv2->GPLv2+ | LGPLv2 -> LGPLv2+ | GPLv2 -> GPLv2+v3 | LGPLv2 -> LGPLv2+LGPLv3 | BSD -> GPLv3 | Ethersex decides |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Kunze, Erik | YES | YES | YES | YES | YES | NO |
