This is the mail archive of the cygwin-licensing mailing list for the cygwin project.
Index Nav: | [Date Index] [Subject Index] [Author Index] [Thread Index] | |
---|---|---|
Message Nav: | [Date Prev] [Date Next] | [Thread Prev] [Thread Next] |
Other format: | [Raw text] |
On Tue, Sep 13, 2011 at 04:04:25PM +1000, Luke Kendall wrote:
Christopher Faylor wrote:
On Tue, Sep 13, 2011 at 01:37:52PM +1000, Luke Kendall wrote:Yes.
Corinna Vinschen wrote:Corinna referenced a page:
Hi Cygwin friends and users,What does that mean in terms of Cygwin components?
I'm happy to announce that, effective immediately, Red Hat has relicensed Cygwin from "GNU Public License version 2" (GPLv2) to "GNU Public License version 3 or later" (GPLv3+).
http://cygwin.com/licensing.html
which barely changed except to mention GPLv3. This many-month old email
was just meant to announce that the Cygwin DLL and associated utilities
were moving from GPLv2 to GPLv3.
Again, there is nothing new here beyond 's/GPLv2/GPLv3'.
Naturally.Each component normally has its own license, so does the aboveRed Hat did not suddenly assume the extralegal power to change the
statement mean that things like the Cygwin DLL and other Cygwin-only
components are under GPLv3?
licensing of other packages.
And yet you are asking if somehow Red Hat had somehow assumed the authority to change the licensing of packages that it doesn't own. It did not.
And there are over 1,800 packages in Cygwin. So I imagine that the change to the GPLv3+ has no effect on any of them.
It affects the Cygwin package which contains the DLL and other Cygwin utilities found in the winsup directory.
cgf
Index Nav: | [Date Index] [Subject Index] [Author Index] [Thread Index] | |
---|---|---|
Message Nav: | [Date Prev] [Date Next] | [Thread Prev] [Thread Next] |