Re: New License/Exception Request: CRYPTOGAMS


Philippe Ombredanne
 

On Mon, Dec 4, 2017 at 11:01 PM, Jason A. Donenfeld <Jason@...> wrote:
Hi Philippe,

Thanks for your response.

On Mon, Dec 4, 2017 at 10:58 PM, Philippe Ombredanne
<pombredanne@...> wrote:
The way this is typically worded in OpenSSL and CRYPTOGRAMS would calls
for this expression IMHO:
OpenSSL OR (BSD-3-Clause OR GPL-2.0)
That sounds fine to me. I'm further wondering - am I allowed to then
take the most restrictive of the three for my derivative work? That
is, in my own code, am I allowed to just write "GPL-2.0" and remove
references to the other two? Or do I still need the full expression
there in order to reference the original licenses which (maybe?)
require they be referenced?
I am not sure what is your use case: for me I tend to always propagate
the choices... so my knee jerk reaction would be to say: do not change
anything! Here, this is clearly a choice of any of the three (rather
than a choice that must be conveyed downstream) though it depends on
"where you got the code from" ...so you might be able to pick anyone
you like best but the details and specifics do matter a lot though!

FWIW, if you elect to go "GPL-2.0" only that would be what we call a
"concluded license" in SPDX -speak ;)

--
Cordially
Philippe Ombredanne

Join Spdx-legal@lists.spdx.org to automatically receive all group messages.