Bug#431109: Disambiguate of Section 12.5, Deprecate GPL/LGPL symlinks

Andreas Barth <abanot.so.argh.org> writes:
> * Florian Weimer (fwdeneb.enyo.de) [070630
10:16]:

>> But do we really want to license everything which
is "GPL version 2 or
>> later" under the GPL version 3?

>> And how do we discriminate between "GPL
version 2 or later" and "GPL
>> version 3 or later"?

> If it says "version N or later", we should of
course point to the
> *earliest* version to give users the choice which
version they want.

Wholeheartedly agreed.  I don't understand the rationale for
doing
anything different.

-- 
Russ Allbery (rradebian.org)               <http://www.eyrie.org
/~eagle/>


-- 
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-policy-REQUESTlists.debian.org
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact
listmasterlists.debian.org

* Russ Allbery:

> Andreas Barth <abanot.so.argh.org>
writes:
>> * Florian Weimer (fwdeneb.enyo.de) [070630
10:16]:
>
>>> But do we really want to license everything
which is "GPL version 2 or
>>> later" under the GPL version 3?
>
>>> And how do we discriminate between "GPL
version 2 or later" and "GPL
>>> version 3 or later"?
>
>> If it says "version N or later", we
should of course point to the
>> *earliest* version to give users the choice which
version they want.
>
> Wholeheartedly agreed.  I don't understand the
rationale for doing
> anything different.

Same here.  My conclusion is that the GPL symlink should not
be
changed.  Policy can still deprecate the symlink, but the
actual
content should not be update for GPLv3.


-- 
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-policy-REQUESTlists.debian.org
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact
listmasterlists.debian.org