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 1H2Q4v-0003Ta-Hm for garchives@archives.gentoo.org; Thu, 04 Jan 2007 10:44:10 +0000 Received: from robin.gentoo.org (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by robin.gentoo.org (8.13.8/8.13.8) with SMTP id l04AhGki026596; Thu, 4 Jan 2007 10:43:16 GMT Received: from MIUMMR0MT04.um.ced.h3g.it ([62.13.171.111]) by robin.gentoo.org (8.13.8/8.13.8) with ESMTP id l04AfAKc007450 for ; Thu, 4 Jan 2007 10:41:10 GMT Received: from c1358217.kevquinn.com (miumgu0vp03.um.ced.h3g.it [10.216.57.163]) by MIUMMR0MT04.um.ced.h3g.it (MOS 3.6.5-GR) with SMTP id ATX26336; Thu, 4 Jan 2007 11:39:55 +0100 (CET) Date: Thu, 4 Jan 2007 11:42:11 +0100 From: "Kevin F. Quinn" To: gentoo-dev@lists.gentoo.org Subject: Re: [gentoo-dev] GPL-2 vs GPL-2+ Message-ID: <20070104114211.0eaabd44@c1358217.kevquinn.com> In-Reply-To: <200701031018.58352.pauldv@gentoo.org> References: <200612222156.55163@enterprise.flameeyes.is-a-geek.org> <20061222155325.0f97c017@dukebook.lan> <200701031018.58352.pauldv@gentoo.org> X-Mailer: Sylpheed-Claws 2.5.6 (GTK+ 2.10.6; i686-pc-linux-gnu) 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: multipart/signed; boundary="Sig_Q9cyOZdb4XUtGGn=Y+/12tv"; protocol="application/pgp-signature"; micalg=PGP-SHA1 X-Archives-Salt: 9f5b4347-dbed-401d-abb0-9bde16a82e78 X-Archives-Hash: bc5aa144b28ed2b861785e1cc4351f7b --Sig_Q9cyOZdb4XUtGGn=Y+/12tv Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable On Wed, 3 Jan 2007 10:18:51 +0100 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." This is effectively what Diego was proposing with the 'GPL-2+' name. > The LICENSE would then be: > LICENSE=3D"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=3D"|| (GPL-2 GPL-3) > GPL-RENEW" This isn't necessary - by creating the 'GPL-2+' license name, the only thing that's not fully correct as things stand is that packages that can be accepted with GPL-2 or later won't be accepted if the user has just GPL-3 in ACCEPT_LICENSES. Over time this can be fixed, by replacing "GPL-2" with "GPL-2+" in the LICENSE variable for the relevant packages. The the meaning of each license name would be strictly: GPL-2 : Only licensed under GPL v2 GPL-3 : Only licensed under GPL v3 GPL-2+ : Licensed under GPL v2 or later Which gives everyone what they need; those wanting GPL-2 or later would have ACCEPT_LICENSES=3D"GPL-2 GPL-3 GPL-2+". For me, the only other sane alternative would be to use license groups (assuming license groups can be specified in the LICENSE variable). I don't recall the status of license groups in portage. --=20 Kevin F. Quinn --Sig_Q9cyOZdb4XUtGGn=Y+/12tv Content-Type: application/pgp-signature; name=signature.asc Content-Disposition: attachment; filename=signature.asc -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v1.4.6 (GNU/Linux) iD8DBQFFnNoI9G2S8dekcG0RAuPUAKDGlLqWC3pV+Yh3NkeOht9cFO58dQCfUxtK DN3BM9im8HeArIFKvxb4gZs= =BQIR -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- --Sig_Q9cyOZdb4XUtGGn=Y+/12tv-- -- gentoo-dev@gentoo.org mailing list