Re: Maybe it's time to fork the GPL License - create the Linux license?

>> The idea of the new license is as follows. It would be backwards
>> compatible with GPL2. It's would eliminate the "or later" clause because
>> we have already seen the potential for abuse there.
>
> The "or later" clause is not part of the actual license. It's part of
> the preamble.

It's mentioned in the preamble, but it is actually a part of the license 
tag you put in your code. </nitpick>


Jan Engelhardt
-- 
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to [email protected]
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/

Follow-Ups:
- Re: Maybe it's time to fork the GPL License - create the Linux license?
  - From: Marc Perkel <[email protected]>

References:
- Maybe it's time to fork the GPL License - create the Linux license?
  - From: Marc Perkel <[email protected]>
- Re: Maybe it's time to fork the GPL License - create the Linux license?
  - From: "Jesper Juhl" <[email protected]>

Prev by Date: Re: [PATCH 3/3] IRQ: Maintain regs pointer globally rather than passing to IRQ handlers
Next by Date: Re: [PATCH 1/6] Generic implemenatation of BUG.
Previous by thread: Re: Maybe it's time to fork the GPL License - create the Linux license?
Next by thread: Re: Maybe it's time to fork the GPL License - create the Linux license?
Index(es):
- Date
- Thread

[Index of Archives] [Kernel Newbies] [Netfilter] [Bugtraq] [Photo] [Stuff] [Gimp] [Yosemite News] [MIPS Linux] [ARM Linux] [Linux Security] [Linux RAID] [Video 4 Linux] [Linux for the blind] [Linux Resources]