On Wednesday 03 January 2007 22:54, Steve Long wrote:
> Paul de Vrieze wrote:
> > I know that I'm a bit late on this, but to me the "version 2 or later" is
> > a license by itself. Let's call it GPL-RENEW and let the file have
> > contents like:
> > "This package is licensed with the version x or later clause for the
> > GPL."
> >
> > The LICENSE would then be:
> > LICENSE="GPL-2 GPL-RENEW"
> >
> > The advantage being that the renew clause is version independent, we
> > don't lose information, don't have to mutilate licenses (by adding text).
> > If desired it could even be used as LICENSE="|| (GPL-2 GPL-3) GPL-RENEW"
>
> That last bit's excessive IMO. It seems to add complexity- does it mean you
> can have either of the GPL2 or 3 plus any later from that version? Why not
> just cover that with your first example, which I like a lot- it spells out
> the later clause, and as you say, is version-independent.
>
> So GPL-3 GPL-RENEW could be specified, as well as simple GPL-2, or GPL-2
> GPL-RENEW. (Just spelling it out, sorry.)
>
> I'm thinking about your example and I can see how it covers a user who
> *wants* to use GPL-3 (eg for their own code) but I still think that comes
> under GPL-2 GPL-RENEW as it's clearly allowed.

My idea for the second way is basically to make the life of tools easier. It 
would make explicit that someone accepting GPL-3, but not GPL-2 would be able 
to accept a GPL-2 and later license.

Paul

-- 
Paul de Vrieze
Gentoo Developer
Mail: pauldv@gentoo.org
Homepage: http://www.devrieze.net