On Sat, 30 Jun 2007, Robert Millan wrote: > On Sat, Jun 30, 2007 at 12:17:00AM +0200, Santiago Vila wrote: > > + file. Packages should not refer to GPL and LGPL symlinks in > > + that directory since different, incompatible versions of these > > + licenses have been published by the Free Software Foundation, > > + hence using the symlinks could lead to ambiguity. > > > > I disagree with this. It should be ok to point to the latest version > > of the GPL if the program says "Version X or later". Many programs > > do that, and we should not need to change them. > > > > Instead, I think we should amend policy in this way: > > > > Packages under a fixed, definite version of the GPL should refer to > > the versioned GPL file in /usr/share/common-licenses. > > Good idea. Should we also specify that referring to the unversioned GPL > is for programs that say "Version X or later" ? I think this is not obvious.
Obvious or not, it is, IMHO, the logical thing to do. If it needs to be written, so be it. What we need is a policy which works when GPL is a symlink to the latest available version and additionaly makes clear what people should do in each case. -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
