Is GPL-2.0-or-later compatible with LGPL-3.0-or-later?
It depends — here's on what:
LGPL and MPL-2.0 can feed a GPL work; EPL cannot. See overrides.
Result license is the more restrictive of the inputs. You must satisfy every input license's notice and source-offer terms. Verify pairwise compatibility first.
Resulting work's license: GPL-2.0-or-later
General guidance, not legal advice.
Obligations when redistributing as open source
- GPL-2.0-or-later: retain the copyright notice and license text.
- GPL-2.0-or-later: state significant changes made to the code.
- GPL-2.0-or-later: provide complete corresponding source of the combined work.
- GPL-2.0-or-later: the combined distributed work must be licensed under GPL-2.0-or-later.
- LGPL-3.0-or-later: retain the copyright notice and license text.
- LGPL-3.0-or-later: state significant changes made to the code.
- LGPL-3.0-or-later: publish the source of any modifications to the library itself.
- LGPL-3.0-or-later: modifications to the library must remain under LGPL-3.0-or-later.
Other distribution models
These licenses sit the same way against each other under every distribution model, but the model decides whether you can ship the result. Not possible under:
- Proprietary software you distribute as a binary — GPL-2.0-or-later requires the entire distributed work to be licensed GPL-2.0-or-later with complete corresponding source, so a proprietary binary is not possible. Distribute the whole work under GPL-2.0-or-later, or replace the GPL-2.0-or-later component.
Check this pair in the tool to switch models.