Relaxing the need for copyright assignments
simon at josefsson.org
Thu Apr 12 12:12:01 CEST 2012
Werner Koch <wk at gnupg.org> writes:
> Nowadays we have wealth of crypto libraries available. It is often
> easier to contribute to them than to Libgcrypt. The copyright
> assignments required for Libgcrypt turned out to be a major hassle and
> thus I plan to relax the rules.
> What do you think of this:
> Libgcrypt is currently licensed under the LGPLv2+ with tools and
> the manual being under the GPLv2+. We may eventually update to a
> newer version of the license or a combination of them. It is thus
> important, that all contributed code allows for an update of the
> license; thus we can't accept any code under the LGPLv2(only).
I think GPLv3+ for tools and and either GPLv3+ or GFDLv1.2+ for the
manual is fine too.
> I pondered with the idea of requiring OpenPGP signed statements but
> rejected it. They don't gain much unless we want to establish another
> complicated procedure to check the trustworthiness of the key. Even if
> we would do so, we will have no way to check the provenience of the
> submitted code.
Couldn't you recommend OpenPGP signed statements, at least?
More information about the Gcrypt-devel