Subject: [Fwd: Re: [Fwd: Re: LGPL 2.1 + GPL 3 = problems?]]
From: Matthew Flaschen <matthew.flaschen@gatech.edu>
Date: Mon, 16 Jul 2007 22:12:10 -0400
Mon, 16 Jul 2007 22:12:10 -0400


Subject: Re: [Fwd: Re: LGPL 2.1 + GPL 3 = problems?]
From: Brett Smith <brett@fsf.org>
Date: Mon, 16 Jul 2007 10:03:37 -0400

> The footnote umder "I want to copy code under LGPLv2.1 and I want to
> release a project under GPLv3 or later" says:
> 
> "Every version of the LGPL gives you permission to relicense the code
> under the corresponding version, or any later version, of the GPL."
> 
> The "or any later version" in the footnote refers to the LGPLv2.1 clause
> that says:
> 
> "(If a newer version than version 2 of the ordinary GNU General Public
> License has appeared, then you can specify that version instead if you
> wish.)"
> 
> But I don't see an equivalent "or any later" clause in LGPLv3.

Matthew,

Thanks for pointing this out.  The original footnotes were much narrower,
and then in a typical programming error I accidentally overgeneralized them
to take care of one particular case.  I've pushed out updates to correct
this mistake.

As for GPLv2-only programs using LGPLv3 libraries, that's something we've
gotten a lot of feedback on since the release, and we're working on ways to
address it more substantively.  To put it another way, I think it deserves
more than a footnote.  :)  I hope we'll have something soon; it's one of my
top priorities, but we want to make sure we do it right, too.

Feel free to pass this on to OSI's list if you want; unfortunately I'm not
subscribed.

Best regards,

-- 
Brett Smith
Licensing Compliance Engineer, Free Software Foundation


 Mon, 16 Jul 2007 10:03:37 -0400