Subject: [bug#41118] [PATCH] gnu: inkscape: Update to 1.0.

From: Leo Famulari <[email-masked]>
Date: Fri, 15 May 2020 10:43:24 -0400

On Fri, May 15, 2020 at 09:36:13AM -0400, Maxim Cournoyer wrote:
> This was made here: https://gitlab.com/inkscape/inkscape/-/issues/784.
> If you have a good grasp of the GPL v2 vs GPL v3 merits, perhaps it'd be
> useful to them to to post that there.  IIRC, I think the big new things
> in GPL v3 were immunization to patent attacks (nice to have for
> Inkscape) as well as preventing tivoization (this is not so applicable),
> and clarifying that linking with GPL code means the whole should be GPL.
> I'll re-read the licenses text in detail when I have a chance.
> 
> Anyway, if this doesn't move quickly enough, we could reluctantly build
> Inkscape with its bundled lib2geom, which is a subset of the full
> lib2geom and which doesn't link with GSL (IIRC).

In <https://gitlab.com/inkscape/inkscape/-/issues/784#note_343293612>
they seem to demonstrate a misunderstanding about lib2geom's license.
That commenter thinks that lib2geom is GPL2+, when it's actually
LGPL-2.1 or MPL-1.1.

However, gnu.org says that LGPL-2.1 is compatible with GPL2 and GPL3. So
maybe it's fine; I don't know. I think we should ask FSF for advice
<https://www.fsf.org/licensing>.