[aur-general] Licenses, GPL3 only

[Philipp Überbacher]

Excerpts from Ronald van Haren's message of 2010-08-26 20:10:00 +0200:
> On Thu, Aug 26, 2010 at 8:00 PM, Xyne <xyne at archlinux.ca> wrote:
> > Philipp Überbacher wrote:
> >
> >> It would be nice to distinguish between GPLvN only and GPLvN or later
> >> for any N. The question is which way is optimal.
> >
> > GPL2
> > GPL2-only
> > GPL3
> > GPL3-only
> > etc
> >
> > Wouldn't that both be clear and avoid sweeping changes as most things are
> > licensed under the standard "this version or later" license?
> >
> 
> clear yes, avoid sweeping changes no.
> 
> most packages are currently gpl2 or later, hence called 'GPL'. These
> need to be changes to GPL2. packages which currently are GPL2 need to
> be converted to GPL2-only.
> You can of course keep both GPL2 and GPL for gpl2 or later for now.
> 
> Ronald

I also wonder about the GPLv1/any case. It's nothing that should be used
anymore, but technically all the perl stuff would need 'GPLv1 or later'
which is the same as 'GPL any'.
-- 
Philipp

--
"Wir stehen selbst enttäuscht und sehn betroffen / Den Vorhang zu
und alle Fragen offen." Bertolt Brecht, Der gute Mensch von Sezuan