1 |
Mounir Lamouri posted on Thu, 03 Sep 2009 23:27:34 +0200 as excerpted: |
2 |
|
3 |
> Rémi Cardona wrote: |
4 |
>> Mounir Lamouri a écrit : |
5 |
>>> Duncan wrote: |
6 |
>>>> Sebastian Pipping posted: |
7 |
>>>> |
8 |
>>>>> However I do notice that "GPL-2+" could make things easier. Why not |
9 |
>>>>> introduce a license group for it like @GPL-2+ |
10 |
>>>>> |
11 |
>>>> I've always thought Gentoo needed "plus" versions of the versioned |
12 |
>>>> licenses, anyway. GPL-2, GPL-2+, GPL-3, and GPL-3+, should all be |
13 |
>>>> different licenses, because really, they are. |
14 |
>>>> |
15 |
>>> AFAIK, GPL-2 and GPL-2+ are not different, |
16 |
>>> may you tell me more about that ? |
17 |
>> |
18 |
>> GPL-2+ means "GPL-2 GPL-3 GPL-4 ..." |
19 |
>> |
20 |
>> Not quite the same thing as just "GPL-2" |
21 |
|
22 |
> But the content of the license is the same. That only means you can use |
23 |
> a newer one. I mean we do not need a new license file for that. It's up |
24 |
> to upstream to write somewhere if it's GPL-2 or GPL-2+, am I right ? |
25 |
|
26 |
Let me quote a different reply of yours: |
27 |
|
28 |
> Groups are not fixing the problem even for free aspect. If I have a |
29 |
> package licensed to LGPL-2, it's not free approved but if it's LGPL-2+, |
30 |
> it is. So I can't add LGPL-2 to @FSF-APPROVED, we agree ? |
31 |
|
32 |
While the license text is the same, but for the condition "or greater" |
33 |
which may be written before or after the license, as you point out, the |
34 |
effective difference can be quite large indeed. It's this difference |
35 |
that in practice, we're worried about here. And our labels don't |
36 |
specifically mean anything (aren't legally valid) anyway. |
37 |
|
38 |
Thus, IMO we need a GPL2+ license description (and others similar), which |
39 |
would incorporate the GPL2 license, with, probably, a clearly delineated |
40 |
explanation at the top, "Gentoo license note: The authors license these |
41 |
works under the GPL-2 or later license. Following is the GPL-2 version. |
42 |
See also GPL-3, etc." Then a line of underscores or the like, clearly |
43 |
separating that note from the license. |
44 |
|
45 |
That would eliminate ambiguity and grouping problems such as you mention |
46 |
above, while, I believe, being legally solid -- as long as our note is |
47 |
clearly delineated from the actual license. |
48 |
|
49 |
-- |
50 |
Duncan - List replies preferred. No HTML msgs. |
51 |
"Every nonfree program has a lord, a master -- |
52 |
and if you use the program, he is your master." Richard Stallman |