On 26 February 2011 13:57, Jeroen Demeyer <[email protected]> wrote: > On 2011-02-26 14:30, David Kirkby wrote: >> On 26 February 2011 12:45, David Joyner <[email protected]> wrote: >>> On Sat, Feb 26, 2011 at 7:19 AM, David Kirkby <[email protected]> >>> wrote: >>> >>>> >>>> So it seems to me we need to "upgrade" to GPL 3, but then that would >>>> stop us using some code which is GPL 2 only. It seems a catch 22. >>>> >>> >>> >>> Which standard packages are GPL2 only? I didn't know there were any. >> >> Just a search of the "COPYING" file shows:at least the following >> appear to be GPL 2 only. I've not investigated these thoroughly, >> though. > > At least Mercurial and PARI are GPLv2+. But for example R is GPLv2 only.
Are you sure about Mercurial and Pari? http://mercurial.selenic.com/about/ says "Mercurial is free software licensed under the terms of the GNU General Public License Version 2." If one clicks the link to the license http://www.gnu.org/licenses/gpl-2.0.txt it says GPL 2, with no mention of GPLv2+, or "any later version", so I'm unsure how you arrive at that. The Pari page has a link to http://www.gnu.org/licenses/gpl.html which is GPL 3, but the source code has a COPYING file that starts: GNU GENERAL PUBLIC LICENSE Version 2, June 1991 So I'm unsure how you arrive at either of those conclusions, though the Pari case is confusing. Dave -- To post to this group, send an email to [email protected] To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to [email protected] For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/sage-devel URL: http://www.sagemath.org
