Re: GNU Arch moves to GPL v3 or later

   >    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.
   >
   > You clearly do not undertstand the GPL,
   >
   >        b. You must cause any work that you distribute or publish, that
   >           in whole or in part contains or is derived from the Program
   >           or any part thereof, to be licensed as a whole at no charge
   >           to all third parties under the terms of this License.
   >
   >
   > `or later' is part of the license terms, much like a the clauses of
   > Bison that allow people to use the output in non-free software.
   >   

   I'm pretty sure you're wrong, Alfred but before I explain why:  can
   you cite a source for that opinion?   Is there something in the FSF's
   GPL FAQ, for example?

Can you quote anything that states otherwise?

Instead of asking silly questions, you can simply send a mail to
[email protected].