Closed dacmot closed 1 year ago
As a note, along with SokolovPavel, here's the other contributors that probably also need to OK this as well, if their code is still in this project anymore.
Both of those users are more active on github than the maintainer is, and of them, antum is much more active.
Good point. I think it should be sufficient to reply to this thread saying "I'm ok with the license change from GPLv2-only to GPLv2 or any later version"
Reminds me, I should add a note about contributors in the readme.
Reposted (in a way) this to the forumn. Pavel's been active there within a year or so. https://forum.minetest.net/viewtopic.php?p=416902#p416902
Pavel was "Last active:Sat Jan 16, 2021 02:22"
I don't have any authority for changing license in this project. But I agree that GPL2 or later would be better for users that want to fork this project.
Thanks @AntumDeluge. That statement is all that is needed from you.
I am not a laywer, so take this with some skepticism: as I understand it, as a contributor, you need to provide your approval to license changes... unless you publicly renounce any and all copyrights on your contributions.
GitHub lists me as a contributor because the developer/owner accepted a pull request from me. I am not a member of the project. @SokolovPavel currently is the only member (as far as I know) that can authorize a change to licensing.
Edit: I understand what you are saying, that for the code that I contributed, I need to give my consent. So yes, for the code that I contributed, I consent to changing to GPLv2 or later.
I generally assume that I relinquish rights to licensing to the project when I contribute code. But I can see why legally it is a good idea to get consent from each contributor.
I also agree with the proposed changes to licensing.
Thanks!
Would you please consider changing the license from GPLv2-only to "GPLv2 or any later version"? Being GPLv2-only technically prevents it being included in GPLv3 code.
From, Is GPLv3 compatible with GPLv2?