[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: proposed FAQ entries about licensing
From: |
Jaroslav Hajek |
Subject: |
Re: proposed FAQ entries about licensing |
Date: |
Wed, 8 Apr 2009 11:30:32 +0200 |
On Wed, Apr 8, 2009 at 11:12 AM, Søren Hauberg <address@hidden> wrote:
> ons, 08 04 2009 kl. 11:08 +0200, skrev Jaroslav Hajek:
>> GPLv2 can be automatically promoted to GPLv3.
>
> Is that true? Doesn't that require the library to be licensed as "GPLv2
> or later" ?
>
> Søren
>
Right, it's not strictly true. What I meant is that the "standard
license header", as advised by FSF (gpl-howto) contains the
auto-promotion clause, so it's very likely to be the case for the code
Judd is referring to.
--
RNDr. Jaroslav Hajek
computing expert & GNU Octave developer
Aeronautical Research and Test Institute (VZLU)
Prague, Czech Republic
url: www.highegg.matfyz.cz
Re: proposed FAQ entries about licensing, Judd Storrs, 2009/04/07
Re: proposed FAQ entries about licensing, John W. Eaton, 2009/04/08
Re: proposed FAQ entries about licensing, Judd Storrs, 2009/04/08
Re: proposed FAQ entries about licensing, Judd Storrs, 2009/04/08
Re: proposed FAQ entries about licensing, John W. Eaton, 2009/04/08
Re: proposed FAQ entries about licensing, Judd Storrs, 2009/04/08
Re: proposed FAQ entries about licensing, John W. Eaton, 2009/04/08
Re: proposed FAQ entries about licensing, Judd Storrs, 2009/04/08