[#2138] Relicense to LGPLv3+/GPLv2+

[SwooshyCueb]

In service of #2138

In order to absorb libs3 into the project, we must relicense to a compatible license with the existing libs3 code.

[trel]

i think we're there on the licensing front - now just need the actual code and confirmation nothing is broken.

[SwooshyCueb]

Should that be a separate PR or do you want me to append it to this one and rename it?

[trel]

separate please... sorry for the confusion.

[SwooshyCueb]

After seeing some discussion on fedi, I've been doing a little bit more reading up on the GPL family of licenses. Added in the GPLv3 and LGPLv3 was a provision that opposes digital rights management. This provision scared away a lot of developers from adopting the licenses, and many groups have done their best to avoid software using these licenses.

Sources:

• https://lwn.net/Articles/202106/
• https://www.cnet.com/tech/tech-industry/torvalds-no-gpl-3-for-linux/
• https://meta.ath0.com/2012/02/05/apples-great-gpl-purge/
• https://archive.org/details/copyleftconf2020-allison

libs3 is licensed under LGPLv3+ or GPLv2+. Allowing distribution under the GPLv2 provides an out for vendors who don't want to deal with the apparently troublesome provision. I think we should do the same. I'll be updating this PR accordingly.

[trel]

that makes sense. i'm familiar with those concerns as well.

[SwooshyCueb]

Am I good to #?

[trel]

I think so. Let's do it.

[SwooshyCueb]

#'d