From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from lists.gentoo.org ([140.105.134.102] helo=robin.gentoo.org) by nuthatch.gentoo.org with esmtp (Exim 4.62) (envelope-from ) id 1Gy3D9-0000k0-NP for garchives@archives.gentoo.org; Sat, 23 Dec 2006 09:30:36 +0000 Received: from robin.gentoo.org (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by robin.gentoo.org (8.13.8/8.13.8) with SMTP id kBN9TYfG030302; Sat, 23 Dec 2006 09:29:34 GMT Received: from dd14500.kasserver.com (dd14500.kasserver.com [85.13.135.241]) by robin.gentoo.org (8.13.8/8.13.8) with ESMTP id kBN9Rg8V011538 for ; Sat, 23 Dec 2006 09:27:42 GMT Received: from hoshino (unknown [82.139.196.236]) by dd14500.kasserver.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id E68B45A589 for ; Sat, 23 Dec 2006 10:27:41 +0100 (CET) From: expose@luftgetrock.net To: gentoo-dev@lists.gentoo.org Subject: Re: [gentoo-dev] GPL-2 vs GPL-2+ Date: Sat, 23 Dec 2006 10:27:38 +0100 User-Agent: KMail/1.9.5 References: <200612222156.55163@enterprise.flameeyes.is-a-geek.org> <200612222331.17989@enterprise.flameeyes.is-a-geek.org> <20061222171707.54b060fe@dukebook.lan> In-Reply-To: <20061222171707.54b060fe@dukebook.lan> Precedence: bulk List-Post: List-Help: List-Unsubscribe: List-Subscribe: List-Id: Gentoo Linux mail X-BeenThere: gentoo-dev@gentoo.org Reply-to: gentoo-dev@lists.gentoo.org MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8" Content-Disposition: inline Message-Id: <200612231027.38144.expose@luftgetrock.net> X-MIME-Autoconverted: from quoted-printable to 8bit by robin.gentoo.org id kBN9Rg8V011538 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable X-MIME-Autoconverted: from 8bit to quoted-printable by robin.gentoo.org id kBN9TYh9030302 X-Archives-Salt: c599545e-3791-4511-a727-63e7ea9a1e98 X-Archives-Hash: 18da94d7d6e5290e6372982b95bce8ab Yuri Vasilevski wrote: [...] > But at the benefit of having less confusion > for users about "What the heck is a GPL-2+?" for at last the same perio= d > of time. [...] > So users will have to check what's the > meaning of that + at the end of GPL-2+, so I think it'll create much > more confusion than the work of updating packages with each new version > of GPL. I think naming them "GPL-2-only" and "GPL-2-or-later" will fix this issue= ,=20 especially if the note mentioned by Diego 'Flameeyes' Petten=C3=B2 will b= e added. If someone is really interested in knowing more about licenses or GPL he = is=20 likely to already know the "GPL 2 or later"-thing, while those not intere= sted=20 in it anyway are likely not to ask :-) Maybe the question arising could be: Did the author say "or later version" or did he say "or any later version= " as=20 maybe (IANAL) it means only "2.*" without that 'any' Something like that would make sense as I would want my software to be=20 licensed under 2.* since they should be compatible but include "fixes" if= a=20 passage is unclear or creates problems in one or the other jurisdiction. Stefan Schweizer wrote: > I see little benifit in having GPL-2+ but a lot of potential confusion = and a > lot of work for developers to check all pkges. What about creating a bug depending on some 11600 others for each package= =20 until it is fixed? (kidding) I agree on that, benefit would be rather small. IF a user really needs to= =20 know, wether it is 2.* or also a later version at his opinion it would fo= r=20 sure not be a problem to just look it up. On the other hand, changing the license should, if at all, be done rather= at=20 once than stepwise to avoid an inconsistend sceme, as I think this is wha= t=20 would create confusion... Ciao, Daniel --=20 gentoo-dev@gentoo.org mailing list