Clarification on licenses and use of MPLv2 in GPLv3+ software

[Johnny Jazeix]

!hi Andreas,

Thank you!

I've read the different threads about the REUSE statements but didn't
took the time to check how much work was needed to apply it to
GCompris.

I've created a task in our backlog to not forget about it:
https://phabricator.kde.org/T13895

Johnny

Le lun. 23 nov. 2020 à 20:23, Andreas Cord-Landwehr
<cordlandwehr at kde.org> a écrit :
>
> Hi Johnny,
>
> I read it exactly the same way. So this looks completely fine to me.
>
> Yet, I would suggest to have a look at REUSE compatible license statements,
> which make it much easier to see which files are under which license. Even if
> one should not refer to oneself for reference, here is a starting point how to
> convert to REUSE compatible license statements [1].
>
> Cheers,
> Andreas
>
> [1] <https://cordlandwehr.wordpress.com/2020/09/20/how-to-convert-a-project-to-reuse-compatible-license-statements/>
>
> On Sonntag, 22. November 2020 18:10:44 CET Johnny Jazeix wrote:
> > Hi,
> >
> > GCompris is released under GPLv3+ license. We incorporated the code of
> > a checkers engine under MPL2 licence
> > (https://github.com/shubhendusaurabh/draughts.js).
> >
> > I would like to be sure that it does not change the licence of
> > GCompris (or if we have to ask for a possible relicensing of the
> > library).
> > As I read the documentation in
> > https://www.gnu.org/licenses/license-list.en.html#MPL-2.0, we are
> > doing a "Larger Work" that combines that library with our GPLv3+ code.
> > The library, under our code, will have both licences (we left the
> > LICENSE file besides) and GCompris can be distributed as GPLv3+.
> >
> > Can anyone confirm if my logic is good?
> >
> > Cheers,
> >
> > Johnny
>
>
>
>