In message <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, Joe Smith
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes
What you are doing is saying "gpe-cash contains some code that is '2
or later' and some code that is '3 only' or '3 or later', therefore 3
is the only licence that is valid for gpe-cash".
To re-iterate. You are NOT changing the pre-existing licence on code
you've borrowed. But because of the mix of licences, the only licence
that is valid for the combined work is v3.
Perhaps a bit pedantic, but you are right. What he is doing is doesn't
actually
change the licences, but the result effectively has the licence of GPL
v3 (or perhaps
GPL v3 or Later).
I know I'm being pedantic. But woolly thinking is behind most confusion
of licencing, and if people actually UNDERSTOOD what is going on, we
wouldn't have a lot of the licencing trouble we do ...
Cheers,
Wol
--
Anthony W. Youngman - [EMAIL PROTECTED]
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
