Re: libgit2 - a true git library

> On Fri, 31 Oct 2008, Pierre Habouzit wrote:
>
>> Last but not least, I believe parts of git-core are currently easy to
>> just take. For example, any code *I* wrote, I hereby give permission to
>> relicense it in any of the following licenses: BSD-like, MIT-like,
>> WTFPL.
>
> First........... is there really a need to re-license it?
> If so then the choice of license is IMHO rather important.

> My favorite license for a library is the GPL with the gcc exception,
> i.e. what libraries coming with gcc are using.  They're GPL but with an
> exception allowing them to be linked with anything.  And because
> everything on a Linux system, including proprietary applications, is
> likely linked against those gcc libs, then there is nothing that would
> prevent libgit to be linked against anything as well.  But the library
> code itself has GPL protection.
>
> For reference, here's the exception text:
>
>   In addition to the permissions in the GNU General Public License, the
>   Free Software Foundation gives you unlimited permission to link the
>   compiled version of this file into combinations with other programs,
>   and to distribute those combinations without any restriction coming
>   from the use of this file.  (The General Public License restrictions
>   do apply in other respects; for example, they cover modification of
>   the file, and distribution when not linked into a combine
>   executable.)