[zizee]

I don't think your point 3 is correct. Wix did not re-apply the MIT to WP's code. Wix only applied the MIT license to their own wrapper code and pointed people the the license of the "dependencies" in their readme.

That said, I am not sure if you license a wrapper code of a GPL library as MIT? My gut says yes as you don't need to distribute the GPL'd code with your code, but I'd be happy to be enlightened.

[revelation]

Of course you can, but that's pretty pointless. The moment someone tries to use the wrapper the wrapped GPL library must also be present, so then the whole thing becomes GPL.

The complaint isn't that the code in the repo isn't GPL, anyway. They released an app with GPLed code but have not released the source.

(There is one exception: if your wrapper just invokes a GPL program as you would on a shell, that's not considered a combined work. But anything else, static or dynamic linking, whatever, it pretty much immediately becomes GPL)

[zizee]

> Of course you can, but that's pretty pointless. The moment someone tries to use the wrapper the wrapped GPL library must also be present, so then the whole thing becomes GPL.

It may be pointless (I don't agree), but I wasn't writing about whether there was a point to it, but whether it could or could not be done.

> The complaint isn't that the code in the repo isn't GPL, anyway.

Where did I say that was what the complaint was? I was just responding to parents comment as I thought it was incorrect. If you read my first comment on this story it was to point this out.