Re: Approxidate licensing

Daniel Barkalow [off-list ref] writes:

Would the three of you agree to license date.c under the LGPL or BSD? It 
looks like you're the only authors of non-trivial changes [1]. And it seems 
reasonable to want the date parsing thing under non-GPL terms outside of 
git.

I do not think I have enough code in there to influence the
license of that file, so what I say below does not matter on
this particular issue.

The project as a whole is GPLv2 and GPLv2 only, but date.c is
isolated enough that I think there are valid form of using it in
your program without making your program a derived work.  In
other words, I do not think I have (even if I had written
significant part of it, which I didn't) right to demand to see
the rest of your program if you used date.c.  I do not think I
even have rights to ask about what kind of program it is.

My wishes about the code I write for this project is very
simple:

     If you improve my code that had helped you to make it help
     you even better, I would like to have that change back, so
     that your change would help me the same way as it helped
     you.

The readers may have noticed that I have slight problem with
GPLv2; in my wish it does not matter if you distribute the
result or not.  And I am selfish.  It is not about helping my
users, but about helping me ;-).