Re: [Savannah-hackers] submission of HTML Help Maker - savannah.nongnu.org

[Jonathan Gonzalez V.]

pabs <address@hidden> writes:

Hi,

> I suppose I should have explained this in the initial submission. The
> reason hhm is GPL2 only is that hhm statically links to an lzx
> compression library that is licenced under the GPL2 only. I'm not very
> adept at reading licences, so I just went with GPL2 only.
>
> If I find the GPL3 acceptable, and linking a GPL>=2 program to a GPL==2
> library is ok, or if myself and matthew (author of lzx_compress) find
> the GPL3 to be an acceptable replacement licence, then I'd be happy to
> migrate to GPL3/GPL>=2.

If 'lzx' it's licensed under GPL v2, there's no problem on linked with
a project licensed under GPL v2 or later, the license still compatible.

We want to keep the compatibility with the future GPL v3, that's why
we suggest you add 'version 2 or later' in the license notices.

> Should I resubmit, or is the submission still in the database?

Yes, you have to resubmit the project again, apologize for this.

> Also, I (and I imagine many other free software developers) would
> appreciate if RMS/GNU would put up a GPL3 page, stating the main changes
> the GPL3 will make, and a summary of the intent of the clauses etc. It
> would be nice if this document was kept up-to-date as development
> progresses. I've seen some things in the press, but I've not seen
> anything on the gnu.org homepage. Sorry for the off-topic message.

You can write an email to the Free Software Foundation or to RMS
asking about this point.

Regards,

-- 
"Emacs the only editor which has its own church"

pgpsIpO7w5G1K.pgp
Description: PGP signature