Follow-up Comment #22, task #16750 (group administration): [comment #21 comment #21:] > > I realise that everything included in my project must be GPL-compatible
Quite right.
> but the Rust standard library is licensed under Expat OR Apache-2.0, both of
> which are free and GPL-compatible. This means that every crate and dependency
> used in it *must* be compatible with them.
I assume "them" means "Expat" or "Apache-2.0"---it's sufficient to be
compatible with either of them. Do we agree about that? Of course, it's
orthogonal to GPL compatibility, isn't it? For example, I may legally add a
module under the original BSD license to my own derivative of Rust standard
library.
> The Rust standard library is its own project, licensed under Expat OR
> Apache-2.0.
I'd like to make it clear. COPYING-library.html reads like, "the next parts
are licensed under their own licenses different from 'Expat or (at your
option) Apache-2.0'; if you can't see a part of library in this list, you may
presume 'Expat or (at your option) Apache-2.0' for that part." Do I
misunderstand anything?
> The _entire Rust project_ is licensed under Expat OR Apache-2.0.
COPYING.html sounds similarly, but it includes more licenses, and some of them
are GPL-incompatible, if I'm not mistaken.
_______________________________________________________
Reply to this item at:
<https://savannah.nongnu.org/task/?16750>
_______________________________________________
Message sent via Savannah
https://savannah.nongnu.org/
signature.asc
Description: PGP signature
