[Date Prev][Date Next] [Thread Prev][Thread Next] [Date Index] [Thread Index]

Re: software licensed under "GPLv2 or later" and "GPLv3 or later"

Tony Mancill <tmancill@debian.org> writes:

> Please cc: me on replies, as I am not subscribed to the list.

Done (I think).

> The upstream README file says that the software is licensed under
> GPLv2 or later, while the comments in the source file indicates that
> it is licensed under GPLv3 or later.

The effective license grant, then, is GPLv3 or later. (GPLv2 is not
possible with that combination.)

> My question is whether there is any discrepancy or need for
> clarification from the upstream author regarding the license before
> the package is submitted to the archive.

You should ask the upstream to alter the README to make it clearer;
that said, the situation you describe is coherent and allows
redistribution in Debian under GPLv3.

 \        “If you ever drop your keys into a river of molten lava, let |
  `\                 'em go, because, man, they're gone.” —Jack Handey |
_o__)                                                                  |
Ben Finney

Reply to: