Re: Bug#431109: [PROPOSAL] Disambiguate of Section 12.5, Deprecate GPL/LGPL symlinks
- To: Florian Weimer <fw@deneb.enyo.de>, 431109@bugs.debian.org
- Cc: Santiago Vila <sanvila@unex.es>, Robert Millan <rmh@aybabtu.com>, debian-legal@lists.debian.org
- Subject: Re: Bug#431109: [PROPOSAL] Disambiguate of Section 12.5, Deprecate GPL/LGPL symlinks
- From: Andreas Barth <aba@not.so.argh.org>
- Date: Sun, 1 Jul 2007 12:49:58 +0200
- Message-id: <[🔎] 20070701104958.GD15872@mails.so.argh.org>
- Mail-followup-to: Andreas Barth <aba@not.so.argh.org>, Florian Weimer <fw@deneb.enyo.de>, 431109@bugs.debian.org, Santiago Vila <sanvila@unex.es>, Robert Millan <rmh@aybabtu.com>, debian-legal@lists.debian.org
- In-reply-to: <87d4zdrhs7.fsf@mid.deneb.enyo.de>
- References: <20070629193137.31108.55438.reportbug@aragorn> <None.LNX.4.64.0706292201200.24042@cantor.unex.es> <20070629220318.GA3168@aragorn> <None.LNX.4.64.0706300011130.26483@cantor.unex.es> <87d4zdrhs7.fsf@mid.deneb.enyo.de>
* Florian Weimer (fw@deneb.enyo.de) [070630 10:16]:
> * Santiago Vila:
>
> > + file. Packages should not refer to GPL and LGPL symlinks in
> > + that directory since different, incompatible versions of these
> > + licenses have been published by the Free Software Foundation,
> > + hence using the symlinks could lead to ambiguity.
> >
> > I disagree with this. It should be ok to point to the latest version
> > of the GPL if the program says "Version X or later". Many programs
> > do that, and we should not need to change them.
>
> But do we really want to license everything which is "GPL version 2 or
> later" under the GPL version 3?
>
> And how do we discriminate between "GPL version 2 or later" and "GPL
> version 3 or later"?
If it says "version N or later", we should of course point to the
*earliest* version to give users the choice which version they want.
Cheers,
Andi
--
http://home.arcor.de/andreas-barth/
Reply to: