Ramifications of Webassembly GPLv2 license?

[mtraynham]

I tried a simple upgrade to Webpack 4.8 and my license checker found the new Webpack version has pulled in the WebassemblyJS code which is licensed under GPLv2. I'm not a lawyer or anything, but is this safe to use?

Seems like it requires all code using this library to be licensed under GPLv2 as well, but as I said, I'm not a lawyer, so I don't really know.

[mohsen1]

@sokra @TheLarkInn this is important

[xtuc]

What's the correct license to use? MIT?

[sokra]

MIT would be great

[sokra]

@mtraynham I'm not a lawyer, but I guess it safe to use this as long you don't ship these code within your application (which webpack doesn't do).

[mtraynham]

Gotcha. I'm just a bit uneasy about the copyleft aspect of GPL and exactly what a derivation means, but you're probably right. It would be great to stick to a permissive free license, such as MIT, Apache or BSD, which doesn't have a copyleft aspect to it. That way, I don't even have to wonder if this is a problem 😄

[TheLarkInn]

MIT would definitely be the desired decision. Is this within our control or from a third party package? Sean

…

On Tue, May 8, 2018, 7:11 AM Matt Traynham ***@***.***> wrote: Gotcha. I'm just a bit uneasy about the copyleft aspect of GPL and exactly what a derivation means. It would be great to stick to a permissive free license, such as MIT, Apache or BSD, which doesn't have a copyleft aspect to it. — You are receiving this because you were mentioned. Reply to this email directly, view it on GitHub <#7229 (comment)>, or mute the thread <https://github.com/notifications/unsubscribe-auth/ADQBMEcDuVf53EM59IEoiP95eUUlwpmUks5twYttgaJpZM4T1suI> .

[montogeek]

@TheLarkInn 3rd https://github.com/xtuc/webassemblyjs/blob/master/LICENCE

[xtuc]

It's me, I'll change it.

[mtraynham]

Thanks guys, much appreciated!