> Given that the combination is GPLv3-only in practice, I think it’s > enough to write ‘gpl3’ (I know we’ve been somewhat inconsistent here…).
In that case, could you use the patch set I sent earlier? That has only the GPL3. http://lists.gnu.org/archive/html/guix-devel/2016-10/msg00974.html
signature.asc
Description: PGP signature
