Added LGPLv3 to top-level of repo.
This is a possibly controversial MR. Feel free to reject.
At the moment, we say that 'you should have received a version of the LGPLv3 with this software'. We do not currently distribute a copy of the LGPL. We distribute a copy of the GPLv3 with our COPYING text file.
I propose that we either:
- Move COPYING to LICENSE.md and include a markdown version of the GPLv3, or
- Remove COPYING and leave this version of the LGPLv3.
@pdraper @matthieu @nnrw56 please could you comment on this.
Merge request reports
Activity
https://www.gnu.org/licenses/why-not-lgpl.html
Sums up the position, do we want to force use only in free software projects, or not. If not we do need the LGPL.
This is correct. All our source files say we license under LGPL v3 but the
COPYING
file is the GPL v3. So that's wrong.We should at least make things consistent and use LGPL v3 at the top of the repo.
I suggest to change the content of the
COPYING
file to the correct license.@jborrow what it the rational for the
LICENSE.md
file?- Edited by Matthieu Schaller
added 1 commit
- c7e39191 - Use the recommended filename for the LGPL licence.
mentioned in commit 091dc8e3
Accroding to https://www.gnu.org/licenses/gpl-howto.html the way to licence your code under LGPL is to have the GPL in the
COPYING
file and the addendum inCOPYING.LESSER
to make it lgpl.