[GRASS-dev] licensing question

GRASS GRASS developer
1

I am writing a new DWG import module based on v.in.dwg that uses
LibreDWG, a free software DWG parsing library
[http://gnu.org/software/libredwg\].

Facts:
1. the module code is based on the original v.in.dwg, GPLv2 or later,
but is not published yet (I am planning to keep the license).
2. LibreDWG is GPLv3 or later.

AFAIK, that would make a dwg-capable binary release GPLv3, but if the
module's code remains GPLv2 or later there would be no conflict with
the current GRASS licensing as long as binary releases are not shipped
with DWG support built in.

Question:
Is there a licensing problem? Would it be possible to host v.in.redwg
in addons-svn?

(I've read http://trac.osgeo.org/grass/wiki/HowToContribute#WriteaccesstotheGRASS-Addons-SVNrepository
and http://download.osgeo.org/grass/grass6_progman/rfc/rfc2_psc.html
before posting to grass-dev, sorry if I'm asking something obvious but
it wasn't clear to me)

Best regards,

--
Rodrigo Rodrigues da Silva
PoliGNU - Grupo de Estudos de Software Livre da Poli/USP
FSF Associate Member #7788

2

is there any other list where I could ask this?

Thanks,

--
Rodrigo Rodrigues da Silva
PoliGNU - Grupo de Estudos de Software Livre da Poli/USP
FSF Associate Member #7788
GNU LibreDWG maintainer

2010/1/11 Rodrigo Rodrigues da Silva <pitanga@members.fsf.org>:

I am writing a new DWG import module based on v.in.dwg that uses
LibreDWG, a free software DWG parsing library
[http://gnu.org/software/libredwg\].

Facts:
1. the module code is based on the original v.in.dwg, GPLv2 or later,
but is not published yet (I am planning to keep the license).
2. LibreDWG is GPLv3 or later.

AFAIK, that would make a dwg-capable binary release GPLv3, but if the
module's code remains GPLv2 or later there would be no conflict with
the current GRASS licensing as long as binary releases are not shipped
with DWG support built in.

Question:
Is there a licensing problem? Would it be possible to host v.in.redwg
in addons-svn?

(I've read http://trac.osgeo.org/grass/wiki/HowToContribute#WriteaccesstotheGRASS-Addons-SVNrepository
and http://download.osgeo.org/grass/grass6_progman/rfc/rfc2_psc.html
before posting to grass-dev, sorry if I'm asking something obvious but
it wasn't clear to me)

Best regards,

--
Rodrigo Rodrigues da Silva
PoliGNU - Grupo de Estudos de Software Livre da Poli/USP
FSF Associate Member #7788

--
Rodrigo Rodrigues da Silva
PoliGNU - Grupo de Estudos de Software Livre da Poli/USP
FSF Associate Member #7788

3

[I wrote this on the 12th, but it doesn't appear to have been sent.]

Rodrigo Rodrigues da Silva wrote:

I am writing a new DWG import module based on v.in.dwg that uses
LibreDWG, a free software DWG parsing library
[http://gnu.org/software/libredwg\].

Facts:
1. the module code is based on the original v.in.dwg, GPLv2 or later,
but is not published yet (I am planning to keep the license).
2. LibreDWG is GPLv3 or later.

AFAIK, that would make a dwg-capable binary release GPLv3, but if the
module's code remains GPLv2 or later there would be no conflict with
the current GRASS licensing as long as binary releases are not shipped
with DWG support built in.

Question:
Is there a licensing problem?

I don't think so. And I don't think that there's a problem including a
LibreDWG-based version of v.in.dwg in any binary release.

All of the GRASS source code can be distributed under the terms of
GPLv2 or later, which allows distibution under the terms of GPLv3.

I'm not sure what (if anything) it means for a binary package to be
"GPLv3 or later" when all of the source code is available under the
"GPLv2 or later" terms.

--
Glynn Clements <glynn@gclements.plus.com>