Hello Bastian, On Tue, Dec 15, 2009 at 4:27 PM, Bastian Blank <[email protected]> wrote: > On Tue, Dec 15, 2009 at 05:05:55PM +0100, Frans Pop wrote: >> IMO the licence is "GPL-2 or higher" (most of the code was developed when >> GPL-2 was active), so the link should probably be to GPL-2. > > IMHO it should only point to GPL-2 if it is GPL v2 only. Describing a > GPL v2 or later code as is always allowed in this context.
In fact the text inside of GPL-2 says this so it looks logical to point to it. The problem of linking to GPL is that it points to latest GPL version (and in this case is GPL 3 ATM). Someone can choose to release a d-i fork as GPL-3 but the code from that moment and afterward will be GPL-3 or later, not GPL-2 or later. -- Otavio Salvador O.S. Systems E-mail: [email protected] http://www.ossystems.com.br Mobile: +55 53 9981-7854 http://projetos.ossystems.com.br -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [email protected] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [email protected]
