Re: unixODBC-GUI-Qt question + 2 patches
Peter Harvey <[email protected]>
| Newsgroups | gmane.comp.db.unixodbc.devel |
|---|---|
| Message-ID | <[email protected]> |
Honza, As far as I am concerned its simply free software so whatever license works for Nick and you works for me. I can do some work on it since you are taking an interest in it - just let me know what you need (aside from the two patches you have here). I can also add you to the project with write privs. Its all good. -- Peter Honza Horak wrote: > Hi Peter, > > I'm not sure if [email protected] still works, so re-sending the > message to sourceforge address as well. > > I'd like you to ask if you could look at the license problem soon, > since we really care about legal things and uncertainty about the > license (see below) cause us a bit troubles. > > Thanks for your time in advance. > > Regards, > > Honza > > > On 12/15/2011 06:32 PM, Honza Horak wrote: >> Hi Peter, >> >> even though unixODBC-GUI-Qt hasn't had a formal release yet, we'd like >> to have it in Fedora, since as soon as we ship unixODBC-2.3.1, users >> would miss that GUI tools. Thus, we had prepared a package from SVN >> commit 95 and I'd like to ask for the following: >> >> It is not obvious what version of GPL/LGPL the unixODBC-GUI-Qt project >> is licensed under (the reason why we cannot take it from GPL.txt is >> described in [1]). I'd like to ask you if you could tell me the version >> of GPL/LGPL and explicitly specify it in the README file at least, >> ideally in all source files where the license is mentioned. >> >> Then I've prepared two patches, you can apply: >> >> The first one is an incorrect FSF address, that is used in sources, see >> the attachment fsf-address.patch. >> >> The second one is a fix, which I had to use to be able to build the >> package, see the attachment qstring.patch. >> >> The last thing is just an idea about a modules libgtrtst.so and >> libodbcinstQ4.so. Maybe I'm wrong, but I haven't seen a reason to use >> libgtrtst.so as a module. ODBCTest is linked against libgtrtst.so >> instead, so I'd say there is no need to treat it as a module from my >> POV. On the other hand libodbcinstQ4.so is definitely used as a module, >> but what do you think about using "-release" and "-avoid-version" >> libtool modes for this one? >> >> [1] >> https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Licensing/FAQ#How_do_I_figure_out_what_version_of_the_GPL.2FLGPL_my_package_is_under.3F >> >> >> >> Regards, >> >> Honza > > _______________________________________________ unixODBC-dev mailing list [email protected] http://mailman.unixodbc.org/mailman/listinfo/unixodbc-dev