2008/4/1, Loui <louipc.ist@xxxxxxxxx>:
[skipped]
Thousands of PKGBUILDs use license=('GPL') for "version 2 or later" already,
there's no point to change this just because of cosmethics
(though I like cosmethics myself :-P).
> > Do we need a GPL1 and GPL1+?
>
> Seems like we would need a GPL1. GPL1+ is logically the same as GPL
> since there are no previous versions (are there?)
I haven't seen a single piece of code licensed under GPLv1 ever. :-)
While I do understand your arguments
this thread has similar opinions as the previous one,
so it doesn't have much use to repeat all arguments again IMHO,
as they all can be read in previous discussion thread.
We're busy with new interesting things now,
so anything like this is definetely very low priority,
even if something like this could be changed.
Thanks for participating in discussions.
--
Roman Kyrylych (Роман Кирилич)
