Re: NEW ocaml licence proposal by upstream, will be part of the 3.08.1 release going into sarge.

[Steve McIntyre <steve@einval.com>]

Raul Miller writes:
>On Thu, Aug 26, 2004 at 09:59:30AM +0200, Bernhard R. Link wrote:
>> Which is GPL v2, nothing else.
>
>GPL v2 includes section 9.
>
>The terms in section 9 do not offer distributors the option
>of avoiding future versions of the GPL.
>
>So either:
>
>[a] You are ignorant of the terms of the license, and "nothing
>else" has no meaning, or
>
>[b] You are trying to distribute under terms more restrictive
>than that of GPL v2.
>
>Which is it?

Erm...

---

  9. The Free Software Foundation may publish revised and/or new versions
of the General Public License from time to time.  Such new versions will
be similar in spirit to the present version, but may differ in detail to
address new problems or concerns.

Each version is given a distinguishing version number.  If the Program
specifies a version number of this License which applies to it and "any
later version", you have the option of following the terms and conditions
either of that version or of any later version published by the Free
Software Foundation.  If the Program does not specify a version number of
this License, you may choose any version ever published by the Free Software
Foundation.

---

This excerpt is quite clear:

A Program may specify GPL2 and "any later version" - check
If the Program just says "GPL", the recipient may use any version - check

If the Program says "GPL v2" alone, there's nothing in S9 that leads
to later versions being applicable.

-- 
Steve McIntyre, Cambridge, UK.                                steve@einval.com
"...In the UNIX world, people tend to interpret `non-technical user'
 as meaning someone who's only ever written one device driver." -- Daniel Pead