Re: Licensing and the library version of git

Hi,

On Thu, 27 Jul 2006, Jon Smirl wrote:

On 7/27/06, Petr Baudis [off-list ref] wrote:

quoted

quoted

You may like trying to force GPL onto the app but many apps are
stuck with the license they have and can't be changed since there is
no way to contact the original developers.

At this point, git-shortlog lists exactly 200 people (at least entries
like Unknown or No name are all linux@horizon.com ;-).

Inability to integrate with Microsoft Visual Studio is going to have a
lot of impact on the cross platform use of git.  Is a conscious
decision being made to stop this integration or is this just unplanned
side effect of the original license? If this is an unplanned side
effect, the quicker we move, the easier it is to fix.

If you want to do it, go ahead. I think the reason it has not been done so 
far is that nobody had the need, or alternatively was not ready to do 
it or hire someone to do it.

Note that only the code going into the library needs to be LGPL. That
should significantly reduce the number of authors that need to be
contacted.

No and no.

Let me tackle the second point first: Almost all functionality is in the 
library, and more is to be transferred to it.

The first point: If you want to integrate git into MSVC, you have to 
provide it via the SCCI. Note that the letter "I" stands for "Interface", 
which makes a runtime linking with the component a non-derivative work. 
Which basically means that you need not GPL MSVC.

A first step to fixing this would be to add an immediate requirement
that all new code that is targeted to library functions be licensed
LGPL. That will at least stop the problem from getting any worse.

If you still feel the need for LGPL, go ahead, find all contributors and 
contact them.

Ciao,
Dscho