This is merely a historical archive of years 2008-2021, before the migration to mailman3.
A maintained and still updated list archive can be found at https://lists.osmocom.org/hyperkitty/list/OpenBSC@lists.osmocom.org/.
Tom Tsou tom at tsou.ccHarald and Vadim, I agree that it is preferable to cover the entire library under a single license. The benefits of a single license outweigh the limited value added by having a few files under the less restrictive license. I approve the re-licensing of the code contained within the optimized Viterbi patchset "core/conv: Fast Viterbi decoding", originally posted to the OpenBSC mailing list on April 28, 2014, from LGPLv2.1 or later to GPLv2 or later. -TT On Sun, Jan 8, 2017 at 5:49 AM, Harald Welte <laforge at gnumonks.org> wrote: > Hi Vadim and Tom, > > as LGPL v2.1-or-later is compatible with GPLv2-or-later, there is not > really a strict requirement for license compatibiltiy reasons. Any > application that links against the GPL-v2-or-later libosmocore has no > license compatibility issues with LGPLv2-or-later, as GPLv2 is the > stricter of the two licenses anyway. > > Still, it is of course good if the entire library is covered under one > license, and people don't have to research and follow different license > terms for each file. Most importantly, we don't want people to assume > all of the librray is LGPL, which is clearly not our intention. > > Regards, > Harald > > -- > - Harald Welte <laforge at gnumonks.org> http://laforge.gnumonks.org/ > ============================================================================ > "Privacy in residential applications is a desirable marketing option." > (ETSI EN 300 175-7 Ch. A6)