1 |
Sebastian Pipping posted on Tue, 01 Sep 2009 04:21:49 +0200 as excerpted: |
2 |
|
3 |
> However I do notice that "GPL-2+" could make things easier. Why not |
4 |
> introduce a license group for it like @GPL-2+ or so, instead? That would |
5 |
> be transparent and use existing means. |
6 |
|
7 |
I've always thought Gentoo needed "plus" versions of the versioned |
8 |
licenses, anyway. GPL-2, GPL-2+, GPL-3, and GPL-3+, should all be |
9 |
different licenses, because really, they are. |
10 |
|
11 |
Then again, there's the various "waiver" conditions, which I /do/ see are |
12 |
covered with separate licenses for many of them, already. |
13 |
|
14 |
But someone already mentioned a license audit, which in practical terms |
15 |
would be needed to really depend on the LICENSE variable in any case. |
16 |
|
17 |
-- |
18 |
Duncan - List replies preferred. No HTML msgs. |
19 |
"Every nonfree program has a lord, a master -- |
20 |
and if you use the program, he is your master." Richard Stallman |