Re: Relicensing Nautilus to GPLv3+
Emilio Pozuelo Monfort <[email protected]> Thu, 18 May 2017 19:02:40 +0200
| Newsgroups | gmane.comp.gnome.desktop,gmane.comp.gnome.nautilus |
|---|---|
| Message-ID | <[email protected]> |
On 18/05/17 18:22, Carlos Soriano via desktop-devel-list wrote: > Hello, > > After asking some authors of the current code that we have as GPL3+ inside > nautilus, and pondering for a while, I realized the practicity of moving away > from that code or convince those authors to relicense as GPL2+ is more a burden > than the real benefit. > > The only problem that arises if Nautilus becomes GPL3+ as per yesteday > discussion in IRC at #gnome-hackers is that extensions that are GPL2-only cannot > be used anymore. > Keep in mind GPL2+ are fine. > > Said this, I took a look at extensions which are not retired from distros and > that have seen a release in at least the last 3 years. So far they are: > nautilus-dropbox - GPL3+ > nautilus-image-converter - GPL2+ > nautilus-pastebin - GPL2+ > nautilus-python - GPL2+ > nautilus-search-tool - GPL2+ > nautilus-sendto - GPL2+ > nautilus-terminal - GPL2+ > > Which is completely fine. As someone already mentioned, if any of those extensions links to a non-GPL3-compatible library, then they won't be compatible with a GPL3+ nautilus. In other words, extensions are now forbidden from linking to GPL2-but-not-GPL3-compatible libraries. I don't know whether there are any examples of extensions that do this. Just thought I'd point this out so the final decision is an informed one. Cheers, Emilio