Hello Jeremy and samba maintainers, I am using Samba 3.0.37 and I am confused about the license. On one hand both the COPYING file in the 3.0.37 tarball and your website indicates that version 3.0.37 is GPLv2. http://news.samba.org/announcements/samba_gplv3/ On the other hand, in the 3.0.37 tarball, there are many files with GPLv3 headers without any exception. For instance, several file in source/client directory. So my question is if it is released under GPLv2, why there are so many GPLv3 license only files ? regards, Rong.
On Tue, Aug 19, 2014 at 02:37:05PM +0800, Ronnie Zheng wrote:> Hello Jeremy and samba maintainers, > > I am using Samba 3.0.37 and I am confused about the license. > On one hand both the COPYING file in the 3.0.37 tarball and your > website indicates that version 3.0.37 is GPLv2. > http://news.samba.org/announcements/samba_gplv3/ > > On the other hand, in the 3.0.37 tarball, there are many files with > GPLv3 headers without any exception. For instance, several file in > source/client directory. > > So my question is if it is released under GPLv2, why there are so many > GPLv3 license only files ?With a quick scan I found source/client/mount.cifs.c, source/client/mount.h and source/client/mtab.c. All three comprise the mount.cifs helper program to mount Linux cifs.ko file systems. Yes, that program might be v3, but Samba proper is v2+. I have not found evidence they are linked together as shipped by Samba. What other files did you find to be v3? Thanks, Volker -- SerNet GmbH, Bahnhofsallee 1b, 37081 G?ttingen phone: +49-551-370000-0, fax: +49-551-370000-9 AG G?ttingen, HRB 2816, GF: Dr. Johannes Loxen http://www.sernet.de, mailto:kontakt at sernet.de
On Tue, Aug 19, 2014 at 02:37:05PM +0800, Ronnie Zheng wrote:> Hello Jeremy and samba maintainers, > > I am using Samba 3.0.37 and I am confused about the license. > On one hand both the COPYING file in the 3.0.37 tarball and your > website indicates that version 3.0.37 is GPLv2. > http://news.samba.org/announcements/samba_gplv3/ > > On the other hand, in the 3.0.37 tarball, there are many files with > GPLv3 headers without any exception. For instance, several file in > source/client directory. > > So my question is if it is released under GPLv2, why there are so many > GPLv3 license only files ?As mentioned (and for the record) this was a mistake, and Samba 3.0.x and all previous versions are intended to be GPLv2-or-later (except for the parts with explicitly more permissive MIT/BSD/LGPL licenses). Jeremy.