4 ms·
If you're worried about the GPLv2 and ASLv2 incompatibility, why not dual license as ASLv2/GPLv2 then instead of ASLv2/MIT?
by jabl 10y ago
If you're worried about the GPLv2 and ASLv2 incompatibility, why not dual license as ASLv2/GPLv2 then instead of ASLv2/MIT?
- JoshTriplett 10y agoBecause porcine flight seems more likely than many OpenSSL developers agreeing to license anything under the GPL?
- jabl 10y agoI wasn't thinking of OpenSSL specifically but rather as a general question. E.g. why is Rust ASL2/MIT licensed (my guess is that it's just what Graydon originally chose for whichever reasons and nobody cares enough to change it)?
- steveklabnik 10y agoIt was originally only Apache2, but MIT was added later to add GPLv2 compatibility.