Christian PERRIER wrote: > I'm just sitting at the annual Samba conference, listening to > B. Kuhn's talk about GPL enforcement and v2/v3 issues (samba is known > to be the first major project to move to GPLv3). > > So, well, just a random idea: would it be such a weird idea to try > moving the licence for various D-I components to either GPLv3 or "v2+" > (v2 and above)? > > What would be the stance of those of us who contributed code in > various D-I packages? > > Mine is actually: I'm perfectly OK with moving the licence of all > components I contributed code to, to GPLv3.
So am I. FWIW, the majority of components are already licensed version 2 or higher. These are licensed v2 only: tzsetup udpkg base-installer installation-guide clock-setup finish-install localechooser network-console palo-installer partman-multipath s390-dasd zipl-installer etch-support lenny-support sarge-support -- see shy jo
signature.asc
Description: Digital signature
