Re: GNU Arch moves to GPL v3 or later

    > In either case, Arch is already incompatible with
the licenseing terms
    > of Linux. Linux is licensed under the GPLv2 only,
while Arch is
    > licensed under GPLv2 or later.

   Wrong.  At present, Arch can incorporate Linux code, and
vice versa,

No, not at all, the license conditions for arch are
_or_later_, these
are terms different than those for Linux, so you _CANNOT_
incoperate
changes from Arch into Linux.  The GPL states that the
license terms
must be the same, since they are not, the two licenses are
not
compatible.  



_______________________________________________
Gnu-arch-users mailing list
Gnu-arch-usersgnu.org

http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/gnu-arch-users

GNU arch home page:
http://sav
annah.gnu.org/projects/gnu-arch/

Alfred M. Szmidt writes:

 >    Wrong.  At present, Arch can incorporate Linux
code, and vice versa,
 > 
 > No, not at all, the license conditions for arch are
_or_later_, these
 > are terms different than those for Linux, so you
_CANNOT_ incoperate
 > changes from Arch into Linux.  The GPL states that the
license terms
 > must be the same, since they are not, the two licenses
are not
 > compatible.  

You're confusing the permissions notice, which allows a
disjunction of
template licenses, with the template licenses themselves,
each of
which individually must remain unchanged.  The "or
later" phrasing is
simply a compact way to express what legally is a multiple
license,
akin to the GPL+FDL licensing recommended by the FSF for
code examples
in documentation.


_______________________________________________
Gnu-arch-users mailing list
Gnu-arch-usersgnu.org

http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/gnu-arch-users

GNU arch home page:
http://sav
annah.gnu.org/projects/gnu-arch/