From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 25631 invoked by alias); 13 Sep 2011 15:38:38 -0000 Received: (qmail 16259 invoked by uid 22791); 13 Sep 2011 15:36:57 -0000 X-SWARE-Spam-Status: No, hits=-1.7 required=5.0 tests=AWL,BAYES_00,DKIM_SIGNED,DKIM_VALID,RCVD_IN_DNSWL_NONE,UNPARSEABLE_RELAY X-Spam-Check-By: sourceware.org X-Yahoo-SMTP: jenXL62swBAWhMTL3wnej93oaS0ClBQOAKs8jbEbx_o- Date: Tue, 13 Sep 2011 15:38:00 -0000 From: Christopher Faylor To: cygwin-licensing@cygwin.com Subject: Re: Cygwin now licensed under GPLv3+ Message-ID: <20110913153623.GC22603@ednor.casa.cgf.cx> Reply-To: cygwin-licensing@cygwin.com Mail-Followup-To: cygwin-licensing@cygwin.com References: <20110419171444.GF23804@calimero.vinschen.de> <4E6ED010.7040300@cisra.canon.com.au> <20110913045747.GB20347@ednor.casa.cgf.cx> <4E6EF269.9060103@cisra.canon.com.au> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <4E6EF269.9060103@cisra.canon.com.au> User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.20 (2009-06-14) Mailing-List: contact cygwin-licensing-help@cygwin.com; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk List-Id: List-Subscribe: List-Post: List-Help: , Sender: cygwin-licensing-owner@cygwin.com Mail-Followup-To: cygwin-licensing@cygwin.com X-SW-Source: 2011-q3/txt/msg00004.txt.bz2 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: >> >>> Corinna Vinschen wrote: >>> >>>> Hi Cygwin friends and users, >>>> >>>> >>>> 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+). >>>> >>>> >>>> >>> What does that mean in terms of Cygwin components? >>> >> >> Corinna referenced a page: >> >> 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. > >Yes. Again, there is nothing new here beyond 's/GPLv2/GPLv3'. >>> Each component normally has its own license, so does the above >>> statement mean that things like the Cygwin DLL and other Cygwin-only >>> components are under GPLv3? >>> >> >> Red Hat did not suddenly assume the extralegal power to change the >> licensing of other packages. > >Naturally. 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