Re: [eigen] copyright / license question

[ Thread Index | Date Index | More Archives ]

Ah ok sure, if it's "LGPL 2.1+" then in particular it's "LGPL 3+". I didn't 
know that one could freely relicense from LGPL to GPL, I understand that 
makes sense.

And sure, I didn't realize that Gael wrote "2.1 or later" so indeed, it seems 
legal to relicense already, but as Cyrille says it never hurts to tell the 


On Monday 03 November 2008 15:54:23 Cyrille Berger wrote:
> Well, if it's LGPLv 2.1 or later, the license specificaly say that you can
> relicense to LGPLv3.0 or later, and also to GPL2+. For the first part, it's
> what the later is for ;)
> For the second one just look at paragraph 3:
> 3. You may opt to apply the terms of the ordinary GNU General Public
> License instead of this License to a given copy of the Library. To do this,
> you must alter all the notices that refer to this License, so that they
> refer to the ordinary GNU General Public License, version 2, instead of to
> this License. (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.) Do not make any other change in these notices.
>  Once this change is made in a given copy, it is irreversible for that
> copy, so the ordinary GNU General Public License applies to all subsequent
> copies and derivative works made from that copy.
>  This option is useful when you wish to copy part of the code of the
> Library into a program that is not a library.
> Well of course, it doesn't prevent you to drop a note to the author, I am
> sure he will be happy to know that his code is use elsewhere ;) And he
> won't have the bad surprise to see his code has been improved but in a
> license he dislikes.


Mail converted by MHonArc 2.6.19+