[License-review] For Approval: Convertible Free Software License, Version 1.3 (C-FSL v1.3)

Rob Landley rob at landley.net
Wed Jan 9 22:33:49 UTC 2019

On 1/8/19 8:13 PM, Brendan Hickey wrote:
> As for the impossibly of relicensing FOSS code under a license that doesn't
> freely allow you to do so, I must disagree. About ten years ago Dungeon Crawl
> was relicensed under the GPLv3. Originally it used the Nethack license, or
> something similar. We contacted about two hundred contributors. In one case we
> secured permission from a contributor's estate. It was a chore, but we did it.

Toybox did something similar switching from GPLv2 to 0BSD circa 2013 (only had
to contact ~7 developers, removed code from at least one I couldn't contact).
And Linux didn't switch _to_ the GPL until 0.12 (before that it was "no
commercial use"), and Linus clarified he meant "GPLv2" in 2000 (in the
2.4.0-test8 release announcement,
http://lkml.iu.edu/hypermail/linux/kernel/0009.1/0096.html and structually that
was dropping a de-facto dual license in the "or later" clause)...

There's more or less a standard procedure for it now:


And of course _when_ you do this, it can destroy the project, such as happened
to xfree86:


And cdrecord:



More information about the License-review mailing list