[Pkg-isocodes-devel] iso-codes license

[Tobias Quathamer]

On Thursday 02 April 2009 18:06:37 Alastair McKinstry wrote:
> The problem is not Microsoft, but BSD and X11 licensed projects ( i
> recall one X11 config tool had a nice
> list of countries that could do with using iso-codes, for example).
> This is why I favoured LGPL for iso-codes.
>
> Perhaps redoing the utils in LGPL might be simpler.

Alright, this has been a quick discussion. I certainly don't object to using 
the LGPL, so if everyone else is in favour of that license, I think we 
should just switch to LGPL completely. I'll do that for the next release, 
then.

Regarding the utils, I think that those programs have been written by 
Alastair, LI Daobing, and myself. Therefore, it's no problem for us (as 
copyright holders) to just relicense them under LGPL.

Thanks everyone for this really quick feedback.

Regards,
Tobias

-- 
Tobias Quathamer | What I can't stand is the feeling that my brain is
Hamburg, Germany | leaving me for someone more interesting.

-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: not available
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 197 bytes
Desc: This is a digitally signed message part.
Url : http://lists.alioth.debian.org/pipermail/pkg-isocodes-devel/attachments/20090403/b65cef69/attachment.pgp