I'm ok with that.

I'm ok with that too.

I'm ok with that too.

Was asked to comment here. If anyone thinks I've contributed enough to have a say I'm fine with relicensing.

fine with me

Sounds good to me

Ok for me

Go ahead !

Fine with me!

No objection from me.

What's missing from comment 0 is an explanation of why you're seeking to make this change, and which files exactly in the gedit source tree you want to relicence. And it's unclear if you want LGPL 2= or 2+.

The plan is to try and relicense to LGPL 2+ to match the gnome/glib/gtk+ licensing scheme with regard to library.

It is also to make it easier for some applications to use it because their current licensing is not fully compatible with GPL. I'm thinking about the usual gstreamer crowd (for the proprietary fluendo modules) and other software that use such libraries (for instance Ekiga uses ptlib/opal, and so has an exception for them ; there are probably a lot of other examples)

As we'd like to avoid chasing exceptions forever, licensing the code as LGPL looks like a good compromise.

Note that rhythmbox and totem are currently consumers of the gedit plugin API (which was copy-pasted from gedit), and ships it as GPL + exception with the agreement of the copyright holders.

From the bug #435523 I've got the list of people we need the agreement:

Committers from Epiphany:
adamh
chpe
crispin
diegoe (trivial, patch from Chris Wilson)
jframeau (trivial, only a comment)
marco

fine with me

fine with me.

Created attachment 146573 [details] [review]
relicense patch

The patch we want to apply in case you want to know the files to be relicensed.

Fine with me.

I hereby give you permission to relicence the parts of the code from the libgpe repo at git://code.istique.net/libgpe.git commit 09fe284a33e9888a5f960a2ffb86c0878092f7ab, that I own the copyright on, to "LGPL 2.1 or (at your option) any later version".

Thanks to all of you for giving the approval. The patch is now pushed.

Created attachment 296847 [details] [review]
Relicense as LGPL 2.1+