[arvid]

I know this licensing stuff will chase me, but didn't realize this fast.

I'm not into discouraging you to improve the software (rather the contrary), just wanted to make you aware that you are currently violating the GPL and thus (at least theoretically) risk a lawsuit for copyright infringement.

I've contacted codeplex to ask them for a customer license display, i.e. GPLv3. See how it goes,

Good luck with that; I believe your chances will be close to 0; GPLv3 isn't exactly in the interest of Microsoft. http://blog.milkingthegnu.org/2008/0...soft-lost.html

BTW, I have a question, inside BWA source, many files come with MIT, how does these two work together? And when you use many MIT files, you can still release code with GPLv3? (Forgive me for these simple questions maybe.)

AFAIK, you can release a program under the GPLv3 which is using MIT libraries (but not the other way around), and distribution ("conveying" in GPLv3-speak) in one package should be fine as long as it is clear to the end user which libraries are which, and that the MIT license terms are clearly included for those parts (check the first paragraph on http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/MIT_License).

Cheers,
Samuel