[LAD] AMS LV2 plugins: Version 0.0.6

[Brendan Jones]

On 01/15/2012 12:57 PM, Aurélien Leblond wrote:
>
> On Jan 12, 2012 7:09 AM, "Brendan Jones" <brendan.jones.it at gmail.com
> <mailto:brendan.jones.it at gmail.com>> wrote:
>  >
>  > On 01/01/2012 03:55 PM, Aurélien Leblond wrote:
>  >>
>  >> Hello everyone,
>  >>
>  >> During this jolly holidays, I worked a bit on the AMS LV2 plugins.
>  >>
>  >> The version 0.0.6 can be downloaded here:
>  >>
> http://sourceforge.net/projects/avwlv2/files/avw.lv2.0.0.6.tar.gz/download
>  >
>  > can you just clarify the license for this for me? The Fedora review
> has asked me wether it is GPLv2 (as in the license file) or GPLv3 as per
> the sourceforge page?
>
> I'm actually not sure here!
> The GPL is v2 in the code as it's the same one as coming from AMS.
> I chose the v3 kind of "by accident" on Sourceforge (i.e. I didn't pay
> attention!)
>
> To be honest:
> - I'm not even sure of what is the difference between the version 2 and
> the version 3 of the GPL.
> - The code is ported from AMS. Am I aload to change the license just
> like that?
>
> (it's crazy how although the concept of open-source is easy to grasp, it
> gets quickly more complex when you dive into the licenses themselves)
>
> Any advice here guys? It's my first open-source project and I'm kind of
> lost!
>
> @Fons: is it OK with you if I update the License to the GPLv3?
>
> Thanks in advance for your help.
>
> Aurélien
>
Hi Aurélien,

thanks for getting back to me. You can find some of your answers here 
[1]. If AMS is GPL V2 both licenses would be perfectly valid in your case.

Depending on which one you choose, you will need to update the license 
file. The license on your project page is not really of consequence its 
just confusing. I would also suggest that you add headers to all of your 
source code in the event that someone derives something from your work.

regards,

Brendan

[1] http://www.ifross.org/en/what-difference-between-gplv2-and-gplv3