On Du, 29 ian 12, 17:27:53, Charles Plessy wrote: > > This is well underlined by the fact that that when people exchange > contributions under the GPL-2+, the terms are always “or (at your option) any > later…”. Wouldn't it be inconsistent to ask relicensing under “MIT and (GPL-2 > or GPL-3+)” ? I'm trying to make it very clear to contributors that they (as Authors) have to agree to (both) MIT and GPL-2+, not *either* or. The w.d.o/license page avoids this ambiguity because it doesn't state what the license is, but what license can be used to redistribute/modify. As a counterexample see http://qt.nokia.com/about/licensing/frequently-asked-questions#under-what-licenses-is Hope this explains, Andrei -- Offtopic discussions among Debian users and developers: http://lists.alioth.debian.org/mailman/listinfo/d-community-offtopic
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: Digital signature