[Top][All Lists]

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

Re: [Gnu-arch-users] Re: GPLv2 or GPLv2+

From: Thomas Lord
Subject: Re: [Gnu-arch-users] Re: GPLv2 or GPLv2+
Date: Fri, 16 Nov 2007 04:07:26 -0800
User-agent: Thunderbird (X11/20060808)

Miles Bader wrote:
"Stephen J. Turnbull" <address@hidden> writes:
 > Sorry for the mess but, whatcha gonna do?

Is there a mess?  Legally, it's perfectly clear that it's GPLv2-only.

The issue, AFAICS is simply that some people actually _intend_ to follow
"FSF practice" and make their files GPLVx+, but don't realize they need
to say this.  So it would generally help to reduce confusion to use an
explicit statement in each file, even in case where it's technically


The mess from my part is just paperwork.   I'm happy with any of /my/ code
under v2 or v3 (and, indeed, slightly prefer v3 for reasons not important here).

So flip any files you like *EXCEPT DON'T* unless you sort out who the
copyright-significant contributors are to the various files and get them to
agree to the change too -- which is, what I gather, Andy is reporting that the FSF
is doing.

It's a slight mess. A bunch of tedious shuffling and permissions gathering that,
ideally, ought not to have been an issue at this late date.

(I still think it's a pretty *minor* mess but, it is a mess.)


reply via email to

[Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread]