Interesting project. I read some of the source code you have published, and some files are licensed under the GPLv2 or later: http://git.kernel.org/?p=network/ofono/ofono.git;a=blob;f=gdbus/mainloop.... However, many files are licensed under the GPLv2 only, with no option of using later license versions, for example: http://git.kernel.org/?p=network/ofono/ofono.git;a=blob;f=gatchat/gatchat... http://git.kernel.org/?p=network/ofono/ofono.git;a=blob;f=src/dbus-gsm.c;... Has it been a conscious decision to use GPLv2-only for some files?

Are you aware that using GPLv2-only makes your work license incompatible with (L)GPLv3 work? If I understand correctly, you cannot combine any of your GPLv2-only work with code licensed under the LGPLv3 or GPLv3. The GPLv2-only license is not compatible with the (L)GPLv3 license, see: http://www.gnu.org/licenses/gpl-faq.html#AllCompatibility I would humbly request that you use GPLv2-or-later for code instead, to allow you, and everyone else, to combine your work with (L)GPLv3 code.

>> Interesting project. I read some of the source code you have published, >> and some files are licensed under the GPLv2 or later: >> >> http://git.kernel.org/?p=network/ofono/ofono.git;a=blob;f=gdbus/mainloop.... >> >> However, many files are licensed under the GPLv2 only, with no option of >> using later license versions, for example: >> >> http://git.kernel.org/?p=network/ofono/ofono.git;a=blob;f=gatchat/gatchat... >> http://git.kernel.org/?p=network/ofono/ofono.git;a=blob;f=src/dbus-gsm.c;... >> >> Has it been a conscious decision to use GPLv2-only for some files? > > these are on purpose this way. The files gdbus/*.[ch] contain the > original license and copyright from the BlueZ project, because they are > copied from there. > > All the rest of the oFono source code is GPLv2 only. Ah, thanks for explaining. Maybe these details could be recorded in documentation somewhere. When/if will be packaged for a GNU/Linux distribution, it will become relevant.

>> Are you aware that using GPLv2-only makes your work license incompatible >> with (L)GPLv3 work? If I understand correctly, you cannot combine any >> of your GPLv2-only work with code licensed under the LGPLv3 or GPLv3. >> The GPLv2-only license is not compatible with the (L)GPLv3 license, see: >> >> http://www.gnu.org/licenses/gpl-faq.html#AllCompatibility >> >> I would humbly request that you use GPLv2-or-later for code instead, to >> allow you, and everyone else, to combine your work with (L)GPLv3 code. > > That is not really up to me and there are concerns with the GPLv3 > license that hasn't been addressed properly at this moment. I am not a > lawyer and I am bound by company policy in this regard. Sure, I understand. > Even if we would switch to GPLv3 license, then we can not be linked with > GPLv2 or LGPLv2 only code. Btw, using the LGPLv2+ would allow for combining with any *GPLv* license. Of course, that wouldn't work for the BlueZ code.