| Re: [eigen] Relicensing Eigen |
[ Thread Index |
Date Index
| More lists.tuxfamily.org/eigen Archives
]
- To: eigen@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
- Subject: Re: [eigen] Relicensing Eigen
- From: Benoit Jacob <jacob.benoit.1@xxxxxxxxx>
- Date: Thu, 28 Jun 2012 15:03:30 -0400
- Dkim-signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20120113; h=mime-version:in-reply-to:references:date:message-id:subject:from:to :content-type:content-transfer-encoding; bh=gtoBypO60Zu+cB0GKEnaJRYXBjv+CpkJZQpDaNIO7X8=; b=NpEG03OZzWpp/Kc1mRTMiQZG9HcLvdhDhrQ9lmE5lZpxIqiekPnBo0C0TqoxRQ6Ggu PRaBM9f8B1cMXOIYRp9lmaea4G/ke9F4RkHwetmtrqzBuduXR03MPY3otm9s5I3fKx5l ZzWwXSK/JCGsta9dBo6pd+tWYlaiw+KwUFR7NX03yLhNT/mnBDm4mSd1BSwgBR04Dzxz MZ4KY+8bwaF6HzE2txYW9wpm/+DspXuDujdAcmGfccVDPRKgR+pQQcyBGO5j5bEZDZAF QHqLdyGC5yzYWV5P9/MeJes0/G/HR88dytFZph1xLeILd0DSLhnWYCTwsiARlK55b0Fz ja/g==
Hi Keir,
I've just been slow, and didn't realize how much it mattered for you.
We seem to have consensus now to relicense, but I was hoping to find
some time to investigate exactly how the MPL-GPL compatibility works.
If this is extremely urgent, one possible approach is to first
immediately add MPL as an alternate licensing option, and then only
later once the analysis is done, remove the existing LGPL+GPL options.
Thoughts?
Benoit
2012/6/28 Keir Mierle <mierle@xxxxxxxxx>:
> Hi everyone,
>
> Has there been any progress on moving to MPL 2.0 (or, even better, BSD/MIT)?
> I am now in the difficult position of not being able to use Eigen, or even
> my own contributions to Eigen, due to the license. LGPL3 compliance is not
> as trivial as the Eigen webpage suggests, according to an
> OSS-knowledgeable lawyer I have talked to about Eigen. Removing an Eigen
> dependency from my code is not trivial.
>
> If the relicense can't happen, and on a reasonably short timeframe (a month
> or two) I may have to consider starting an API compatible re-implementation
> of the subset of Eigen we need. Obviously, this is the last thing I want to
> do.
>
> Keir