Re: [gNewSense-users] KFV question no licence or author

[Karl Goetz]

On Fri, 2008-04-04 at 18:28 -0400, Bake Timmons wrote:
> > A work "Under the GPL" needs no clarification. a work without a
> > copyright notice should get clarificatio.
> 
> Although I have documented files with GPL2 in this case for KFV, I am
> perfectly happy simply repeating "Under the GPL", *especially* since the
> script I use always includes the original file comment to remove all
> doubts.

sounds reasonable enough. one day i'll have to download the mode/script
just to see what all the fuss is about ;)

> 
> > We can only distribute under GPL2 in the context of Linux. if you take
> > the same  GPL'd code (with no GPL version specified) you could then
> > include it in a GPL3 project and distribute it as GPL3.
> > kk
> 
> I agree about the Linux context and would be happy to agree with the
> rest.  Fortunately for KFV, the Linux context is good enough.

absolutely.
kk

-- 
Karl Goetz <address@hidden>

signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part