Approxidate licensing

I'm working on an LGPL project (for my company; it's obscure enough and we're lazy enough that we're not really distributing it in general in either source or binary form), and I'm running into the usual date parsing issue (i.e., all the standard functions are broken in various ways). My plan has been to write my own, but it's hard to get the motivation when approxidate exists, works well, and is open source.

Would the three of you agree to license date.c under the LGPL or BSD? It looks like you're the only authors of non-trivial changes [1]. And it seems reasonable to want the date parsing thing under non-GPL terms outside of git.

	-Daniel
*This .sig left intentionally blank*

[1] git log and git blame are pretty impressive, but they don't quite catch that most of date.c was written by David as part of commit-tree.c, then Tony replaced it with a version that uses curl, then Edgar separated it out into a date.c and simultaneously reverted Tony's changes. On the other hand, the commit messages do say this, and you can use git log and git blame to verify that they're true. The only thing they don't let you verify is what the differences are between the date.c added in ecee9d9e and the similar part of commit-tree.c in 812666c8. If someone wants to make git blame *really* magic, date.c would be a good test case.