[wp-hackers] Apache 2.0 License?
mikeschinkel at newclarity.net
Sat Mar 19 21:34:28 UTC 2011
Thanks. So in a nutshell am I reading that you think it should be okay to include Apache v2.0 licensed dependency into a GPLv2 licensed plugin and that it should be allowed in the repository?
Can anyone official confirm this?
On Mar 19, 2011, at 5:18 PM, Iain Cambridge wrote:
> Well I think it's safe to say Mark Jaquith wasn't thinking since GPL
> v3 is later than GPL v2 and his response says it has to be GPL - more
> specificallt GPL v2 or later. Also the plugin about  states it has
> to be compatable with GPL which according to gnu  Apache V 2.0 is.
>  http://wordpress.org/extend/plugins/about/
>  http://www.gnu.org/licenses/license-list.html#GPLCompatibleLicenses
> On 19 March 2011 18:51, Chip Bennett <chip at chipbennett.net> wrote:
>> I'm guessing that it would not be allowed.
>> After all, even with the official WordPress License "clarification", the
>> official policy is that even GPLv3 Plugins will not be allowed to be hosted
>> in the Plugin Repository:
>> But perhaps the stance will change?
>> On Sat, Mar 19, 2011 at 1:47 PM, Mike Schinkel
>> <mikeschinkel at newclarity.net>wrote:
>>> This question got me thinking. It seems that excanvas is becoming a
>>> with Apache 2.0, not GPL 2.
>>> The core question I'm asking is would a plugin that is otherwise GPL
>>> licensed be denied inclusion into the WordPress plugin repository if it
>>> includes excanvas because of the Apache 2.0 license? Or given the
>>> circumstances would the potential license conflicts be overlooked?
>>>  http://excanvas.sourceforge.net/
>>> wp-hackers mailing list
>>> wp-hackers at lists.automattic.com
>> wp-hackers mailing list
>> wp-hackers at lists.automattic.com
> wp-hackers mailing list
> wp-hackers at lists.automattic.com
More information about the wp-hackers