From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 29903 invoked by alias); 11 Jul 2007 15:30:57 -0000 Received: (qmail 29893 invoked by uid 22791); 11 Jul 2007 15:30:56 -0000 X-Spam-Check-By: sourceware.org Received: from mx1.redhat.com (HELO mx1.redhat.com) (66.187.233.31) by sourceware.org (qpsmtpd/0.31) with ESMTP; Wed, 11 Jul 2007 15:30:54 +0000 Received: from int-mx1.corp.redhat.com (int-mx1.corp.redhat.com [172.16.52.254]) by mx1.redhat.com (8.13.1/8.13.1) with ESMTP id l6BFRkub017004 for ; Wed, 11 Jul 2007 11:30:52 -0400 Received: from pobox.fab.redhat.com (pobox.fab.redhat.com [10.33.63.12]) by int-mx1.corp.redhat.com (8.13.1/8.13.1) with ESMTP id l6BEBIko006405; Wed, 11 Jul 2007 10:11:19 -0400 Received: from [10.33.6.7] (vpn-6-7.fab.redhat.com [10.33.6.7]) by pobox.fab.redhat.com (8.13.1/8.13.1) with ESMTP id l6BEBIXq030337; Wed, 11 Jul 2007 10:11:18 -0400 Message-ID: <4694E508.2020302@redhat.com> Date: Wed, 11 Jul 2007 16:19:00 -0000 From: Nick Clifton User-Agent: Thunderbird 1.5.0.10 (X11/20070301) MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Jakub Jelinek CC: binutils@sourceware.org Subject: Re: Switching GAS to GPLv3 References: <20070703113243.GF4603@sunsite.mff.cuni.cz> In-Reply-To: <20070703113243.GF4603@sunsite.mff.cuni.cz> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-IsSubscribed: yes Mailing-List: contact binutils-help@sourceware.org; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk List-Id: List-Subscribe: List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: , Sender: binutils-owner@sourceware.org X-SW-Source: 2007-07/txt/msg00237.txt.bz2 Hi Jakub, > What does this mean for backporting fixes from binutils trunk to older > binutils releases? > Does this mean backports are not possible at all, or do we have to > relicense our legacy releases (that we want to backport stuff to) to GPLv3? I have received this reply from the FSF: : Since the previous releases were licensed under GPLv2 or later, all : maintainers need to do is upgrade their backport to GPLv3 or later -- then : they'll be able to incorporate patches that were never released under : GPLv2. : : If there's enough demand for this, you may be able to make life easier for : those maintainers, if you want, by providing patches that upgrade the : license on binutils from "GPLv2 or later" to "GPLv3 or later." Hopefully : those would be easy to generate after you did this upgrade for the code : yourself, and each maintainer wouldn't have to do the work themselves. : After you published them, backport maintainers could apply them to their : own backports, and then also go ahead to incorporate later patches that : were released under GPLv3 or later. So the answer appears to be that in order to apply patches made to GPLv3 sources to previous releases we have to change the affected files over to the GPLv3 as well. Cheers Nick