Re: License text for LGPL-3.0

Max Mehl

~ Steve Winslow [2022-01-10 22:33 +0100]:

REUSE would like to see the combined LGPL-3.0 + GPL-3.0 text used as the
plain text file for LGPL-3.0 on the License List. That way, anyone pulling
from the plain text licenses will (correctly) include both the LGPL and GPL

To implement this, the XML template for LGPL-3.0 would also be updated, to
add the GPL-3.0 text with <optional> tags following the non-optional
LGPL-3.0 text.

Personally, I'm +1 to make these changes:
* It solves the problem REUSE has identified for their use case
* It means that the LGPL-3.0-* templates will continue to match standalone
files with only the LGPL text, as well as matching files that contain the
combined LGPL+GPL texts.
* It doesn't resolve all possible ambiguities about "did you mean
everything in this repo is LGPL, or that some things are LGPL and some are
GPL?" But neither does the current state of affairs. Using SPDX short-form
license IDs and/or standard license headers solves this. So I don't see
this as particularly significant to this specific proposal.

Please discuss.
Following up on Steve's proposal, I see many people agreeing on it, or
at least shrugging. There has been a proposal by Alexios that would
require a larger rework as I understand it, but it feels not like a
blocker to this concrete proposal, rather like a good idea to make
special cases like these easier to handle in the future.

Are there any more blockers?


Max Mehl - Programme Manager - Free Software Foundation Europe
Contact and information: | @mxmehl
Become a supporter of software freedom:

Join to automatically receive all group messages.