On Mon, Aug 31, 2020 at 8:00 AM SFD-discuss posted:

https://github.com/Haivision/srt/blob/master/LICENSE have been under MPLv2 but https://github.com/Edward-Wu/srt-live-server/blob/master/LICENSE is under MIT which is not a compatible Free Software License.

If you have to blend these 2 to meet your purpose then you are not using Free Software anymore but the blend will become a proprietary one. Freedom once compromised then you are not having the freedom anymore brother. :)

I thought MIT license was compatible with GNU GPL. It's in the list of licenses marked green on https://www.gnu.org/licenses/license-list.en.html#X11License It says FSF recommends Apache 2.0 over this license, but it's still compatible with GNU GPL licenses. I wish the FSF list was more specific over the licenses like the OSI is ( https://opensource.org/licenses/MIT ). It would be nice if they linked to the license text to confirm they are discussing the same license you're reading. By the way, both MPLv2 and MIT are OSI approved licenses. I know both the MinGW-w64 and the MinGW projects chose to move to MIT license for their runtime and API libraries and are using it with the GNU compiler (GPL license). Are you saying that if you use MPLv2 with MIT that it's no longer GPL compatible? Because either license on its own with code that's GPL is compatible. MPLv1.1 is an issue with GPL, but many projects switched to 2 to avoid that.