On Thu, Jul 26, 2007 at 04:34:00PM -0700, Toshio Kuratomi wrote:
> On Thu, 2007-07-26 at 19:24 -0500, Tom "spot" Callaway wrote:
> > On Fri, 2007-07-27 at 01:13 +0200, Till Maas wrote:
> > > On Friday 27 July 2007 01:27:59 Tom "spot" Callaway wrote:
> > >
> > > > and http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Licensing .
> > >
> > > Why are no "(L)GPLv3" columns and "(L)GPLv3 or later" rows in the GPL
> > > Compatibility Matrix?
> >
> > Because the FSF makes no distinction. I don't think there would be any
> > difference, since there is not currently a "later".
> >
> If this is true, I have a slightly cosmetic comment:
>
> GPL and LGPL get an "or later" clause while other licenses would have to
> jump through the dual license hoops to achieve the same thing. Perhaps
> it would be better to define an "operator" to mean or later?
>
> (And I nominate "+=" as the most logical and ugliest operator for the
> job :-)
A comparison operator (>=) would make more sense
--
Axel.Thimm at ATrpms.net
pgplsXmEp8eal.pgp
Description: PGP signature
|
