Replies: 3 comments
|
Thanks for this suggestion, we are looking into this. I will make sure to include any updates here. |
0 replies
|
Hello, has there been any conclusion from the considerations? |
0 replies
|
Converting this to a Discussion. It's an improvements we plan to pursue over time rather than one actionable change with a near-term milestone, so a Discussion better fits collecting the specifics and design input. |
0 replies
Sign up for free
to join this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in to comment
Uh oh!
There was an error while loading. Please reload this page.
Describe the feature
Distribute the C++ SDK under two liberal licenses.
Use Case
s3fs is licensed as a GPLv2 or later program. GPLv2 is not compatible with Apache v2 and thus the license effectively upgrades to GPLv3 or later.
Proposed Solution
Dual license the SDK like Rust does:
https://www.rust-lang.org/policies/licenses
Other Information
Some discussion about Apache and GPL licenses:
https://www.apache.org/licenses/GPL-compatibility.html
Further StackOverflow discussion which states and incompatibility with GPLv2:
https://opensource.stackexchange.com/questions/1357/can-i-link-a-apache-2-0-library-into-software-under-gplv2
Acknowledgements
All reactions