"Maciej W. Rozycki" <ma...@orcam.me.uk> writes: > My interpretation of this would be for modifications rather than original > sources, so v3+ applies to unmodified sources (for obvious reasons, given > that the recipient of the sources is not a copyright holder), however as a > copyright holder I can release my modifications say under v4 or v4+. It > is unclear to me if the newer licence will then "stick" to the rest of the > sources, but I suspect it will. A copyright assignment made to FSF (or > another legal entity) prevents this complication from happening.
I see two cases here: 1. You release a modified copy of gcc, your parts can be whatever you want, sure, as long as it's GPLv3 compatible. 2. You're contributing *to* gcc, in which case, I'd hope that any attempts to impose a different license would be rejected at the patch review step.