Maximilian <maximil...@actoflaw.co.uk> writes: > and this seems to imply that the end user can choose which licence > suits them.
Not only the end user -- also (in our case) the upstream author. So, he can choose to redistribute the files under GPL-3+. Being them modified or not. > However, if Emmanuel Bertin's code is specifically licensed as GPLv3 > only then it needs to be made clear that this is the case where > applicable - the fact that this code is GPLv3 only ought not affect > the fact that the other original files may be GPLv2+. True. However, the original files are not in the upstream tarball and therefore do not need to be documented in debian/copyright. This is even the case if original and redistributed filed differ only by their license. Best regards Ole -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-legal-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: https://lists.debian.org/ytza8wnmsm1....@news.ole.ath.cx
