On 17/06/13 17:11, Robert Relyea wrote: > On 06/17/2013 10:58 AM, Chris Newman wrote: >> I'll mention one other usability issue. I am getting pressure from my >> employer to stop using NSS due to the MPL 2 license. I got less >> pressure when I could use NSS under the LGPL 2.1 branch of the >> tri-license. Switching to OpenSSL has been suggested. > > My understanding is you can morph MPL 2 into LGPL 2.1 if you need to > (that's an explicit part of MPL 2).
That is true, for a definition of "need" which is "need to for license compatibility reasons because the larger work is GPL/LGPL". It is not true for a definition of "need" which is "I like the terms better". MPL 2 section 3.3 covers this: http://www.mozilla.org/MPL/2.0/ " If the Larger Work is a combination of Covered Software with a work governed by one or more Secondary Licenses ... this License permits You to additionally distribute such Covered Software under the terms of such Secondary License(s)". Gerv -- dev-tech-crypto mailing list dev-tech-crypto@lists.mozilla.org https://lists.mozilla.org/listinfo/dev-tech-crypto
