Gentoo Archives: gentoo-dev

From: Ulrich Mueller <ulm@g.o>
To: "Matija Šuklje" <matija@××××××.name>
Cc: "Robin H. Johnson" <robbat2@g.o>, "Michał Górny" <mgorny@g.o>, gentoo-dev <gentoo-dev@l.g.o>, licenses@g.o, qa <qa@g.o>
Subject: Re: [gentoo-dev] [RFC] Solving the problem of huge number of wrong LICENSES=*GPL-[23]
Date: Mon, 27 Aug 2018 07:35:40
1 >>>>> On Mon, 27 Aug 2018, Matija Šuklje wrote:
3 > The GNU family was a special case and it was a very difficult and long
4 > discussion/negotiation about it before the consensus was made. It was
5 > caused by FSF’s very strong stance on this and the trade-off is that FSF
6 > now recommends SPDX as well:
7 > <>
9 I wonder what the goal of that is? If someone says "you can redistribute
10 under GPL version 2" (i.e. if they have removed the "or later" clause
11 from the boilerplate license notice), it is very clear that it is to be
12 distributed under GPL version 2 and no other license (like GPL-1, GPL-3,
13 BSD, CDDL, or any other). So I wonder why RMS's article tries to muddle
14 that up.
16 For example, we have "GNU General Public License v2" in all ebuild
17 headers, and no one has ever challenged that it could mean "v2 or
18 later". As much as I regret that it doesn't say "or later", I think
19 there's absolutely no room for interpretation here.
21 Ulrich


File name MIME type
signature.asc application/pgp-signature