On Sunday 22 July 2007, Todd Zullinger wrote: > Ville Skyttä wrote: > > On Sunday 22 July 2007, Hans de Goede wrote: > >> Ville Skyttä wrote: > >>> On Sunday 22 July 2007, Hans de Goede wrote: > >>>> For those who want to know, gkrellm has moved to GPL v3, coming > >>>> from GPL v2 > >>> > >>> What implications does this have on gkrellm plugins, most of which > >>> I think are currently "GPL v2 or later"? > >> > >> IANAL, but I guess that when used with the latest gkrellm they have > >> just become GPL v3 or later. > > > > In that case, do packagers need to do something about the v2+ > > copyright notices included in the plugin packages or embedded in > > their code? > > If the copyright notice includes the text (or something similar): > > "This program is free software; you can redistribute it and/or modify > it under the terms of the GNU General Public License as published by > the Free Software Foundation; either version 2 of the License, or (at > your option) any later version." > > Then wouldn't it already be covered? Dunno. When combined with v3 work (which I gather is what happens when one compiles a gkrellm plugin against the new v3 gkrellm), it would seem to me that the result is no longer distributable as v2. If that's the case, saying "v2 or later" in the copyright notices bundled with the distributable doesn't sound right to me. -- Fedora-maintainers mailing list Fedora-maintainers@xxxxxxxxxx https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-maintainers -- Fedora-maintainers-readonly mailing list Fedora-maintainers-readonly@xxxxxxxxxx https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-maintainers-readonly
