AT licence

[Blitz]

I noticed that AT is GPLv2. I believe the recommended licence is now GPLv3.

Is there any particular reason AT is GPLv2?

[ctnbeh13]

I noticed that AT is GPLv2. I believe the recommended licence is now GPLv3.

Is there any particular reason AT is GPLv2?

I'm not sure to what extent you are familiar with GPLv2 and v3, and the similarity and differences they offer. It is true that GPLv3 is the more recent of the two, but as far as it being the "recommended" version really depends on your intended use. For example, at the GNU website, under "Frequently Asked Questions about the GNU Licenses", (at the following link of http://www.gnu.org/licenses/gpl-faq.htm ... patibility), you will find the following point (FAQ);


Is GPLv3 compatible with GPLv2? (#v2v3Compatibility)

No. Some of the requirements in GPLv3, such as the requirement to provide Installation Information, do not exist in GPLv2. As a result, the licenses are not compatible: if you tried to combine code released under both these licenses, you would violate section 6 of GPLv2.

However, if code is released under GPL “version 2 or later,” that is compatible with GPLv3 because GPLv3 is one of the options it permits.


If you still may have a specific question regarding the choice, or method of licensing for Andor’s Trail, please consider sending Oskar a P.M. This would probably be your best approach. I'm sure that he would be more than happy to offer any clarification on the matter in more detail upon his return from a brief, and well deserved, retreat. Many contributors have provided content for this project, some of which are not my place to disclose the conditions associated with.

I hope this was of some help.

[Blitz]

I noticed that AT is GPLv2. I believe the recommended licence is now GPLv3.

Is there any particular reason AT is GPLv2?

I'm not sure to what extent you are familiar with GPLv2 and v3, and the similarity and differences they offer. It is true that GPLv3 is the more recent of the two, but as far as it being the "recommended" version really depends on your intended use. For example, at the GNU website, under "Frequently Asked Questions about the GNU Licenses", (at the following link of http://www.gnu.org/licenses/gpl-faq.htm ... patibility), you will find the following point (FAQ);


Is GPLv3 compatible with GPLv2? (#v2v3Compatibility)

No. Some of the requirements in GPLv3, such as the requirement to provide Installation Information, do not exist in GPLv2. As a result, the licenses are not compatible: if you tried to combine code released under both these licenses, you would violate section 6 of GPLv2.

However, if code is released under GPL “version 2 or later,” that is compatible with GPLv3 because GPLv3 is one of the options it permits.


If you still may have a specific question regarding the choice, or method of licensing for Andor’s Trail, please consider sending Oskar a P.M. This would probably be your best approach. I'm sure that he would be more than happy to offer any clarification on the matter in more detail upon his return from a brief, and well deserved, retreat. Many contributors have provided content for this project, some of which are not my place to disclose the conditions associated with.

I hope this was of some help.

Thanks for that!

I'm not a programmer but I am familiar with the licences. I asked this question out of curiosity. Nothing else...

[sdevaney]

From my understanding v3 contains a few clauses that don't exactly work for AT and some of the licenses that were given to us for some of the graphical assets.

However the actual code (non graphical/content assets) could be licensed under v2 or later.

None of us are lawyers so we do the best we can and err on the side of caution.

Hope that helps answer your question
sdevaney