On Sun, 30 Mar 2008 16:32:54 +0100 "Raeven Bathory" <raeven.bathory@xxxxxxxxx> wrote: > Loui <louipc.ist@xxxxxxxxx> wrote: > > "Roman Kyrylych" <roman.kyrylych@xxxxxxxxx> wrote: > > > GPL2 "or, at your opinion, any later version" is not the same as GPL2 > > > only + GPL3 or later. ;) > > > > > > > Can you explain why they are not the same? I don't quite > > understand why that doesn't work. Thanks. > > > http://gplv3.fsf.org/wiki/index.php/Compatible_licenses#GPLv3-incompatible_licenses Yes, I already understood that GPL2 and GPL3 are incompatible but that doesn't mean a project can't license under both terms. If you own the code you can do whatever the hell you want. That's why you have some projects that have dual open licensing and commercial licensing. Your link doesn't do anything to explain why (GPL2 or later, GPL3) is practically any different than (GPL2, GPL3) Am I missing anything? Please let me know.
