> Perhaps the maintainers of the C versions should do the same in reverse.
Nitpick: they don't need to, they can just attribute the Rust developers if needed. They can also just take MIT code and publish it under GPL (reverse is not true).
Nitpick: they don't need to, they can just attribute the Rust developers if needed. They can also just take MIT code and publish it under GPL (reverse is not true).
http://undeadly.org/cgi?action=article&sid=20070913014315
I'm not sure that is even legal.
LLVM did it. Switching from "University of Illinois/NCSA" to "APL 2.0".
But not without some big discussions.
A similar thing happened to OpenOffice / LibreOffice: [0]
> OpenOffice uses the Apache License, whereas LibreOffice uses a dual LGPLv3/Mozilla Public license.
> For some legal reasons, then, anything OpenOffice does can be incorporated into LibreOffice, the terms of the license permit that. But if LibreOffice adds something, take font embedding, for example, OpenOffice can’t legally incorporate that code.
[0] https://hackaday.com/2020/11/02/openoffice-or-libreoffice-a-...