[Savannah-register-public] Re: [task #7859] Submission of OpenCDK Lite

[Simon Josefsson]

Sylvain Beucler <address@hidden> writes:

> Update of task #7859 (project administration):
>
>                   Status:                    None => Wait reply             
>              Assigned to:                    None => Beuc                   
>
>     _______________________________________________________
>
> Follow-up Comment #1:
>
> Hi,
>
> Can you precise how the relicensing is done, legally speaking?
> For example:
> - tarball: misc.c: GPL, copyright Timo Schulz & FSF
> - git: misc.c: LGPL, copyright FSF
>
> Was there a copyright assignement and FSF-originated relicensing?
>
> Just doing routine checks :)

OpenCDK (GPL) has traditionally been included in the GPL'ed parts of
GnuTLS, but Nikos wanted to move this to the LGPL parts of GnuTLS
instead.  He talked to RMS about this, and after some long discussions
and as far as I understand, it was agreed that it is OK to re-license
only the minimal part of OpenCDK that we need in GnuTLS.  These minimal
parts is what will be in opencdk-lite.

Timo has assigned the copyright to the FSF under a GnuTLS assignment,
see fencepost.

See also:

http://lists.gnu.org/archive/html/gnutls-devel/2008-03/msg00037.html

I wasn't directly involved in the re-licensing discussions, so I just
trust what Nikos said in that mailing list post.  It may be useful to
ask Nikos and/or RMS about this if you want an official decision.

Thanks,
/Simon