Re: Confusion about license wording

["Suraj N. Kurapati" <skurapat@ucsc.edu>]

Walter Landry wrote:
> MJ Ray <mjr@phonecoop.coop> wrote:
>> Suraj N. Kurapati <skurapat@ucsc.edu> wrote:
>>> (2) In the last sentence, does the phrase "must reflect all 
>>> modifications" mean that all past, present, and future
>>> modifications must also be included?
>>> 
>>> I think that including past modifications is prohibitive and 
>>> including future modifications is impossible.
>> It may be prohibitive, but it seems to be the request.
>> 
>> Future is impossible, I agree.
> 
> I do not see the problem here.  The license is saying that the
> Code must include all modifications that went into making the
> Subset.  You can't release a patched Subset with an unpatched
> Code.  In other words, the Code must correspond to the Subset.

Thanks for your explanation.  I see now that without the third
sentence, the license would be allowing redistribution of a patched
Subset with an unpatched Code.  Thus, the third sentence is indeed
necessary to prevent such behavior.