Question about relicensing of exo code

Yves-Alexis Perez corsac at
Fri Nov 5 15:39:13 CET 2010

On ven., 2010-11-05 at 15:36 +0100, Xavier D. wrote:
> I'm packaging thunar-vfs for Archlinux so yes I would like to know which 
> one I should use in my package.

The tarball license.

> I'll put LGPLv2 + GPLv2 if you don't see any objections ?

That's not my call. Note that thunar-vfs is *not* dual licensed. It's
LGPLv2 before exo-hal inclusion, and would be GPLv2 if some GPLv2 code
was integrated. Now aiui Benny thought exo-hal was LGPLv2 so it might be
interpreted as his acknowledgement to relicense it to LGPLv2, but I'm
not a lawyer.

-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: signature.asc
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 836 bytes
Desc: This is a digitally signed message part
URL: <>

More information about the Xfce4-dev mailing list