adam/znc
1
0 Fork 0
mirror of https://github.com/znc/znc.git synced 2026-10-31 01:32:02 +01:00
Code Issues 362 Packages Projects Releases Wiki Activity

Possible upgrade of GPL license to v3 #140

New Issue
Closed
opened 2026-10-05 04:01:02 +02:00 by adam · 5 comments
adam commented 2026-10-05 04:01:02 +02:00
Owner
Copy link
Copy source

I have been trying to get http://twitter.github.com/bootstrap this implemented as base for the webadmin stuff. I already converted the entire interface on my local installation of znc (https://znc.yas-online.net don't mind the ssl warning self signed cert).

The problem now is that this project runs under GPL v2 which is incompatible with Apache License 2.0 (http://www.apache.org/licenses/GPL-compatibility.html). Therefor i would like to request upgrading the GPL license, if it doesn't come with unwanted side effects.

I have been trying to get http://twitter.github.com/bootstrap this implemented as base for the webadmin stuff. I already converted the entire interface on my local installation of znc (https://znc.yas-online.net don't mind the ssl warning self signed cert). The problem now is that this project runs under GPL v2 which is incompatible with Apache License 2.0 (http://www.apache.org/licenses/GPL-compatibility.html). Therefor i would like to request upgrading the GPL license, if it doesn't come with unwanted side effects. <!-- github-sync-id:6508347 -->
adam closed this issue 2026-10-05 04:01:02 +02:00
adam commented 2026-10-05 04:01:03 +02:00
Author
Owner
Copy link
Copy source

http://wiki.znc.in/Developer:License

http://wiki.znc.in/Developer:License <!-- github-comment-id:11412392 -->
adam commented 2026-10-05 04:01:04 +02:00
Author
Owner
Copy link
Copy source

I would personally vote for Apache, or even LGPL, for what it's worth, just to get away from the linking clauses in the standard GPL licenses that tend to make people or businesses hesitant to use or contribute to certain projects.

I would personally vote for Apache, or even LGPL, for what it's worth, just to get away from the linking clauses in the standard GPL licenses that tend to make people or businesses hesitant to use or contribute to certain projects. <!-- github-comment-id:11412598 -->
adam commented 2026-10-05 04:01:05 +02:00
Author
Owner
Copy link
Copy source

I don't know how LGPL is but Apache V2.0 is my personal favorite for certain reasons, one being the rather free distribution policy.

The link provided in first post currently does not provide the redesigned version! I'm converting the interface for 1.0+ at the moment.

I don't know how LGPL is but Apache V2.0 is my personal favorite for certain reasons, one being the rather free distribution policy. **The link provided in first post currently does not provide the redesigned version! I'm converting the interface for 1.0+ at the moment.** <!-- github-comment-id:11414081 -->
adam commented 2026-10-05 04:01:06 +02:00
Author
Owner
Copy link
Copy source

You can describe all those thoughts/reasons at that page :)

You can describe all those thoughts/reasons at that page :) <!-- github-comment-id:11414370 -->
adam commented 2026-10-05 04:01:06 +02:00
Author
Owner
Copy link
Copy source

I've added some links to each of the license contents, as well as some hopefully unbiased pros, cons, and general comments.

I've added some links to each of the license contents, as well as some hopefully unbiased pros, cons, and general comments. <!-- github-comment-id:11583607 -->
Sign in to join this conversation.
No Branch/Tag Specified
Labels
No items
No labels
Milestone
No items
No Milestone
Projects
Clear projects
No projects
Assignees
Clear assignees
adam (Adam Wojcieszonek)
No Assignees
1 Participants
Notifications
Due Date
No due date set.
Dependencies

No dependencies set.

Reference: adam/znc#140