> It is already under the GPL with the clause "either version 2 of the > License, or (at your option) any later version."
Some cautions... If someone *does* distribute a copy under GPL3, and someone else modifies that copy, the modifications are under GPL3, not GPL2+. We may not be able to use them in the mainline without permission to relicense. One reason to move to GPL3 is if GPL2 has loopholes you wish to close. The "GPL2 or higher" variant doesn't close old loopholes, it only allows new permissions. The FSF is pushing GPL3 *hard*. That means it will become harder to mix packages; for example, geda linked with GPL3 libraries *is* GPL3 at that point; GPL3 is not compatible with GPL2 (the other way is compatible). Fortunately for us, we use mostly system libraries, which are excepted by GPL2. _______________________________________________ geda-dev mailing list [email protected] http://www.seul.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/geda-dev
