Git licensing is the set of terms under which the Git distributed version control system, the libgit2 library and the Git for Windows distribution may be used, modified and passed on. Git is released under the GNU General Public License version 2.0, which the official Git website describes as an open source licence.[2] The licence file in the Git source tree limits the project to that version alone, “ie v2, not v2.2 or v3.x or whatever”, unless a file explicitly states otherwise.[1] In SPDX notation that is GPL-2.0-only, as distinguished from GPL-2.0-or-later.[3] The licence places no limit on running the software. Its conditions apply when Git is copied, modified or distributed to others.[1] There is no licence fee and no licence metric, and the Git project sells no edition. For software asset managers, the questions Git raises are therefore about distribution, trademark and version currency rather than entitlement counts. For the general model, see open-source software licensing and software license.
Editions
The Git project publishes one product, the Git source code. Operating systems and other projects build and package it. The projects covered by this article are:
| Project | What it is | Licence |
|---|---|---|
| Git | The command-line version control tools, published by the Git Project and distributed as source and through packagers[2] | GPL-2.0-only; some parts of the tree are under other licences compatible with GPLv2[1][5] |
| Git for Windows | The Windows distribution of Git, with Git BASH, Git GUI and supporting tools; installer, portable and MinGit packages[15][12] | Git under GPL version 2; bundled components such as Bash, zlib, curl, Tcl/Tk, Perl and MSYS2 under their own licences[10] |
| libgit2 | A separate project: a C library implementing Git’s core methods, used from other languages through bindings[7] | GPL version 2 only with a linking exception[6] |
There are no commercial, enterprise or support editions from the Git project. The GPL allows any distributor to charge a fee for the physical act of transferring a copy, and to sell warranty protection.[1] Paid Git support is therefore sold by third parties, if at all, and those terms are outside this article. Catalog proof: A fee may be charged for transferring copies and for warranty.
Metrics
The Git project publishes no licence metric, and the catalog holds no metric rows for it. The GPL text states that the program is “licensed free of charge”.[1] Money reaches the project as donations, which Software Freedom Conservancy accepts on its behalf.[9] Catalog proof: Git is licensed free of charge.
Counting / floors
Internal use (licence text of June 1991, as retrieved 2026-09-27). GPL-2.0 §0 states that activities other than copying, distribution and modification are outside the licence’s scope, and that “the act of running the Program is not restricted”.[1] §5 adds that a person need not accept the licence at all unless they modify or distribute the program.[1] The licence therefore contains no user, device, core, installation or commercial-use limit, and there is nothing to count for an effective license position. An organization may install Git on any number of workstations, build servers and containers for its own work. Catalog proof: Running Git is outside the scope of the licence.
Floors. None. No minimum, maximum or registration applies.
Licences
GPL-2.0-only
The Open Source Initiative lists the GNU General Public License version 2 among its approved licences, under the SPDX short identifier GPL-2.0.[4] SPDX records GPL-2.0-only as both OSI approved and FSF free/libre.[3] The project note in Git’s COPYING file excludes later GPL versions.[1] A recipient therefore cannot elect GPL-3.0 terms for Git, as GPL-2.0 §9 would otherwise allow for a program that names “any later version”.[1] Catalog proof: Git is licensed under GPL version 2 only; GPL-2.0 is an OSI-approved and FSF free licence.
Other licences in the Git source tree
The Git README says that some parts of Git are under different licences that are compatible with GPLv2.[5] Examples include the SHA-1 collision detection code (MIT), the reftable library (BSD) and LibXDiff (LGPL 2.1 or later). See Git GPL-2.0 obligations and the libgit2 linking exception. Catalog proof: Parts of the Git source tree carry other GPLv2-compatible licences.
libgit2 linking exception
libgit2 is also licensed under GPL version 2 only. Its authors add “unlimited permission to link the compiled version of this library into combinations with other programs”, and to distribute those combinations without restriction arising from the library.[6] The libgit2 README says this means the library can be used from any program, “proprietary or open source; paid or gratis”. Anyone who modifies libgit2 itself must still distribute the source of the modified version.[7] The wording follows the SPDX GCC Runtime Library exception 2.0, except that it names “the authors” where the SPDX text names the Free Software Foundation.[16][6] Catalog proof: libgit2 may be linked into proprietary programs under its linking exception; Modifications to libgit2 itself remain under GPL-2.0.
Redistribution and modification
The GPL’s conditions apply when Git leaves the organization. Examples are a software product, appliance, container image or installer that includes Git and is given or sold to customers. They also apply to a modified Git that is published. The main obligations in the licence text are:
| Obligation | GPL-2.0 section | Catalog row |
|---|---|---|
| Keep copyright and no-warranty notices, and give recipients a copy of the licence | §1[1] | Redistributed copies must keep notices and include the licence |
| Mark modified files with a notice of the change and its date | §2(a)[1] | Modified files must carry change notices |
| License a distributed work based on Git as a whole under GPL-2.0, at no charge | §2(b)[1] | Distributed works based on Git must be licensed as a whole under GPL-2.0 |
| Provide complete corresponding source with binaries, or a written offer valid for at least three years | §3(a), §3(b)[1] | Source code must accompany distributed Git binaries or be offered for three years |
| Impose no further restrictions on recipients | §6[1] | No further restrictions may be imposed on recipients |
Mere aggregation of a separate work with Git on the same storage or distribution medium does not bring that work under the GPL.[1] Distribution that does not comply terminates the distributor’s rights automatically.[1] Catalog proof: Mere aggregation with Git does not extend the GPL to other works; Non-compliant distribution terminates the licence automatically. The full set of obligations, and how they differ for libgit2, is covered in Git GPL-2.0 obligations and the libgit2 linking exception.
Trademark
The Git Project is a member project of Software Freedom Conservancy, which holds the rights in the Git marks on the project’s behalf. The marks are the word “Git”, the Git logos and the slogan “the stupid content tracker”. The mark is registered in the United States under Registration 4680534.[8] The policy covers only the marks and does not address copyright in the software.[8] Its main terms (policy undated, as retrieved 2026-09-27):
- Permitted without written permission. Referring to Git in substantially unmodified form, identifying Git as a distinct component of a software offering, and referring factually to the Git Project. “Substantially unmodified” means built from Git Project source, possibly with minor changes such as different default features, translations, compatibility changes for an operating system distribution or bug-fix patches. Conservancy charges no fee for these uses.[8] Catalog proof: The Git name may be used without permission or fee to refer to unmodified Git.
- Derivatives and compatible products. Modified Git may be described as a “derivative of” or “based on” Git. An interoperable product may be named “[Product Name] for Git”. Uses that suggest a designated successor, such as “Git++”, are not permitted.[8] Catalog proof: Modified Git must be described as "based on" or a "derivative of" Git.
- No portmanteaus. The marks may not be used as a syllable in a new word or as part of a portmanteau for a third-party product or service. GitHub and GitLab are exceptions under licensing arrangements that pre-date the policy.[8] Catalog proof: Git may not be used as a syllable or portmanteau in third-party marks.
- Merchandise. Merchandise bearing the marks may not be made or sold without Conservancy’s approval.[8] Catalog proof: Merchandise bearing the Git marks needs permission.
The official website notes that the project restricts use of the term “Git” and the logos to avoid confusion, while licensing the software under GPLv2.[2]
Bundled third-party components
Git for Windows ships more than Git. Its release notes say that it is distributed with other components, “such as Bash, zlib, curl, tcl/tk, perl, MSYS2”, and that each is governed by its own licence.[10] The FAQ adds that the Perl it contains is dual licensed under the GPL and the Artistic License.[11] MinGit is a minimal, non-interactive distribution for third-party applications. It leaves out Tcl/Tk and Perl, among other components.[12] libgit2 bundles code under the zlib licence, the PCRE2 licence, the LGPL, the MIT licence and others, each listed in its COPYING file.[6] Catalog proof: Git for Windows bundles components under their own licences; MinGit is the Git for Windows distribution intended for bundling in applications; libgit2 bundled dependencies carry their own licences. See Git for Windows components, versions and deployment.
Virtualization & partitioning
Not applicable. Because running Git is not restricted,[1] virtual machines, containers and partitions need no licences. The GPL obligations apply to a virtual machine or container image that includes Git when that image is distributed to others, in the same way as to any other binary distribution.
Cloud / BYOL
No bring-your-own-licence rule applies, because there is no licence to bring. Using Git on cloud infrastructure is running the program. Hosted services built around Git, such as GitHub and GitLab, are separate products under their own terms. Their use of the name is covered by the pre-existing trademark arrangements the Git policy mentions.[8] See GitHub Copilot licensing for one of those services.
Programs
The Git project runs no commercial programs, subscriptions, support contracts or enterprise agreements, and the catalog holds no program rows for it. Donations are accepted through Software Freedom Conservancy by PayPal, cheque, wire transfer or stock.[9]
Software asset management practice
The points below apply the cited terms to asset management work. They are commentary.
- Discovery. Git sits on most developer workstations and build agents, often more than once. Git for Windows installs from an exe installer or a portable package; there is no MSI.[11] It is also available through winget as
Git.Git.[15] Portable and MinGit copies inside other applications’ folders will not always show up in installed-software inventories.[12] - Version and end-of-support tracking. Git has no Long Term Support versions. Fixes go to the maintenance track of the latest feature release, and older tracks have no formal guarantee of updates.[13] Feature releases are numbered vX.Y.0 and maintenance releases vX.Y.Z, and a feature release cycle is expected to last eight to ten weeks.[14] At retrieval, the current source release was 2.55.0 and the current Git for Windows build 2.55.0(5), released 2026-08-20.[15] Catalog proof: Git has no Long Term Support versions; Git for Windows follows only the newest Git maintenance releases.
- Internal use against redistribution. Internal installations need no licence position. Compliance work is needed where Git, Git for Windows or libgit2 ships inside something the organization distributes. That means source availability, notices and the licence text for Git, plus the notices of every bundled component.[1][10] Recording Git as GPL-2.0-only, and libgit2 as GPL-2.0-only with its linking exception, keeps the two apart in a software bill of materials.[3][6] See license compliance.
- Naming. Internal tools and products with “Git” in the name fall under the trademark policy, not the GPL.[8]
Out of scope
This article does not cover GitHub, GitLab, Bitbucket, Azure Repos or other hosting services. It does not cover Git GUI clients from other publishers, Git LFS, or third-party support offerings. It does not survey the licences of every bundled component of Git for Windows. It is not legal advice on whether a particular combination is a work based on Git.