Le 2011-09-28 à 21:44:00, Marvin Humphrey a écrit :
On Thu, Sep 29, 2011 at 12:44:39AM -0400, Hans-Christoph Steiner wrote:
In my opinion, using GPLv3 has been the easiest of the options. It
means that we can use code that is licensed with a BSD, MIT, Tcl,
Apache, GPLv2, LGPL, GPLv3, etc.. So its the most compatible to the
code that's out there, meaning thinking about licenses less writing more
code that everyone is free to use :)
All I'm gonna say is that I see things from a different angle. :)
I have no idea what the angle is and how that licensing of «overall
project» is supposed to work.
I'm lost.
Besides, I just realised that [pd META] says things like «LICENSE GPL v2»
or «LICENSE GPL v3» but never «LICENSE GPL v2 OR LATER». Isn't that
strange ?
The distinction has to be made between «version 2 only» and «version 2 or
later» and between «version 3 only» and «version 3 and later» (even when,
in that latter case, there is currently no version after 3).
BTW, there are even cases where it just says GPL without version number.
______________________________________________________________________
| Mathieu BOUCHARD ----- téléphone : +1.514.383.3801 ----- Montréal, QC
_______________________________________________
[email protected] mailing list
UNSUBSCRIBE and account-management ->
http://lists.puredata.info/listinfo/pd-list
