In message <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
John-Mark Bell <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> On Sun, 1 Jul 2007, John Tytgat wrote:
>
> > In message <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> > John-Mark Bell <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> >
> >> 2) Come to an agreement about whether to permit the user to relicense
> >> the software under future GPL versions. For reference, GPL version 3
> >> has been recently released. This may be found at
> >> http://www.gnu.org/licenses/gpl-3.0.html
> >
> > No objections for proposals 1 and 2.
>
> Thanks. WRT proposal 2, could you clarify your position, please? (See my
> earlier reply to Kevin Bagust about this -- there's also a 5th option in
> addition to the 4 I outlined there -- "I don't mind either way"). That it
> needs clarification at all is my fault; the proposal was badly worded ;)
I'm fine with permitting relicense NetSurf under future GPL version including
GPL 3 and if there is no consensus on that, I'm fine with not permitting
it either. So that's basically the 5th option I guess. ;)
John.
--
John Tytgat, in his comfy chair at home BASS
[EMAIL PROTECTED] ARM powered, RISC OS driven
