Re: GPL version for monotone

On 05/07/2014 09:02 AM, Stephen Leake wrote:
> Markus Wanner <[email protected]> writes:
>> Alternatively, please resolve the ambiguity by clearly allowing
>> distribution of those files under GPL v2 as well, i.e. change the boiler
>> plate there to state "GNU GPL version 2.0 or greater", as other source
>> files still do. Thanks.
> 
> Done

Thanks you, perfect.

I think we can reasonably back-patch that to the 1.1 tree for
distribution, so we don't run into trouble when claiming monotone to be
GPL-2+. I'll have to do that for Debian. (I'm surprised nobody noticed
that for the entire lifetime of 1.0 in Debian...)

>> Maybe that needs to be revisited, now? Stephen, do you want to pursue
>> a move to GPL-3+, again?
>
> I'm always in favor of moving to GPLv3, but I don't think anything has
> changed in this regard.

Well, quite some time has passed since then.

With a release manager's hat on, as well as from the Debian Maintainer
perspective, I'm glad we can now have that discussion independent of the
release process. Thanks again, for quick and easy clarification.

Regards

Markus Wanner

_______________________________________________
Monotone-devel mailing list
[email protected]
https://lists.nongnu.org/mailman/listinfo/monotone-devel

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1
Comment: Using GnuPG with Icedove - http://www.enigmail.net/

iEYEAREDAAYFAlNp304ACgkQsPwMloDjyo+tYQCfXEVqAZwVBUIGt5IZK8AzUCnI
pJQAoIH4l0vysUfXP3tubmKQPEoBrkfK
=vZfV
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----