[gnutls-devel] end of life of 2.12 and possible relicense on 3.1

Eli Zaretskii eliz at gnu.org
Mon Feb 4 16:56:38 CET 2013

> Date: Mon, 04 Feb 2013 12:40:38 +0100
> From: Nikos Mavrogiannopoulos <nmav at gnutls.org>
> Cc: Stef Walter <stef at thewalter.net>, Olya <olyasib12 at gmail.com>,
> 	Guy Lunardi <guy.lunardi at collabora.com>,
> 	David Woodhouse <dwmw2 at infradead.org>
> Also I am considering into having the next releases in 3.1.x under
> LGPLv2.1 instead of LGPLv3. This is a first step to solve the
> compatibility issues of gnutls with GPLv2 programs. However, to
> completely solve that issue, one would also need to use an older gmp
> library also licensed under LGPLv2.1. (I have not tested that scenario,
> but in the worst case it may require small changes in nettle or gnutls).
> For the relicensing to happen the authors of contributed code after the
> relicense to LGPLv3 date (2011-06-08) have to agree. Note that is only
> about the authors of library code, no relicensing happens on
> documentation (FDL) or the included programs (GPLv3).
> After checking the history in the repository, I've contacted the
> following authors and asked them whether they would agree to relicense
> their code under LGPLv2.1:
> David Woodhouse: Agreed
> Ilya Tumaykin: Agreed
> Ludwig Nussel: Agreed
> Martin Storsjo: Agreed
> Stef Walter: Agreed
> Collabra (Guy Lunardi): Agreed
> Simon Josefsson: Agreed
> Olga Smolenchuk: Didn't agree
> I've tried to check the history carefully, but it is quite a long
> period, so if I have missed any author of code you are aware of please
> let me know.
> If the above is correct, then the heartbeat handling code (which is
> based on Olga's contribution) will be made optional (it is already
> optional on the current release), and the library compiled by default
> will be available under LGPLv2.1.

What will all this mean for Emacs, which can be optionally be built
with GnuTLS and uses GPLv3?

More information about the Gnutls-devel mailing list