pyxcp license about pyxcp

[christoph2]

Yep, I think LGPLv3-or-later is the right way to go.
I'm currently modernizing all of my projects, including installation and meta-data. Here's a related PEP:
https://peps.python.org/pep-0639/

[christoph2]

You're right Daniel,

I'll fix the C++ files today.

[christoph2]

I've just replaced the LICENSE file with the official LGPLv3 text -- not sure if I also need to update the copyright stuff...🙄

[danielhrisca]

Thank you for the update.

not sure if I also need to update the copyright stuff.

Now that you mention I see that the copyright notice has a reference to GPL v2 or later, so it was anyway not matching the previous license file. You probably need to update it, maybe you can just make a reference to the new license file

[waynebeaton]

I've just replaced the LICENSE file with the official LGPLv3 text -- not sure if I also need to update the copyright stuff...roll_eyes

@christoph2, if by "copyright stuff", you mean the file headers, then strictly speaking the answer is yes: you should also update the file headers to reflect the change of license. It's probably also a good idea to confirm with all of the copyright holders (i.e., the contributors) that they agree to the license change.

For consistency, at a minimum, I recommend that you at least change the license mention in the README file.

In lieu of a wholesale update of the headers, can you confirm that it is your intention that all of the files with copyrights attributed to you that currently show GPL-2.0-or-later are as of this commit being distributed under the LGPL-3.0-or-later? (while I believe that it's reasonably implied by #93 (comment) confirmation will mitigate potential for doubt).

[danielhrisca]

Hello Christoph,

It seems that there are still files that contain references to the GPL license (for example

pyxcp/pyxcp/cxx/exceptions.hpp

Line 10 in d82c62e

* it under the terms of the GNU General Public License as published by

)

[danielhrisca]

Thank you!