Hrm...

Post #219,102 by ben_tilly 8/12/05 6:55:15 PM Reply	Hrm... Excellent point. I'll ask a lawyer about that. If your interpretation is correct, then you shouldn't be able to mix GPL v2 only code with GPL v2 or later code. I suspect that you'd satisfy all of the requirements if you included a copyright notice like this: Silly Example 2 is a silly example of a program Copyright (C) 2005 Bob the Modifier This program is free software; you can redistribute it and/or modify it under the terms of the GNU General Public License version 2 as published by the Free Software Foundation. This program is distributed in the hope that it will be useful, but WITHOUT ANY WARRANTY; without even the implied warranty of MERCHANTABILITY or FITNESS FOR A PARTICULAR PURPOSE. See the GNU General Public License for more details. This is based on previous software, and therefore we must include the following notice: Silly Example is a silly example of a program Copyright (C) 1999 Alice the Originator This program is free software; you can redistribute it and/or modify it under the terms of the GNU General Public License as published by the Free Software Foundation; either version 2 of the License, or (at your option) any later version. This program is distributed in the hope that it will be useful, but WITHOUT ANY WARRANTY; without even the implied warranty of MERCHANTABILITY or FITNESS FOR A PARTICULAR PURPOSE. See the GNU General Public License for more details. You should have received a copy of the GNU General Public License along with this program; if not, write to the Free Software Foundation, Inc., 59 Temple Place, Suite 330, Boston, MA 02111-1307 USA But I won't swear to that. Cheers, Ben I have come to believe that idealism without discipline is a quick road to disaster, while discipline without idealism is pointless. -- Aaron Ward (my brother)
Post #219,403 by drewk 8/15/05 3:56:42 PM Reply	You can mix it, but wouldn't it all become v2 only? If there is any code that is v2 only, the derevitive work would have to be v2 only. === Purveyor of Doc Hope's [link\|http://DocHope.com\|fresh-baked dog biscuits and pet treats]. [link\|http://DocHope.com\|http://DocHope.com]
Post #219,411 by ben_tilly 8/15/05 4:27:16 PM Reply	Yabut.. The question is how to reconcile that with the need to remain all original copyright notices, one of which would grant the right to be GPL v2 or later. That is, is GPL v2 only in conflict with GPL v2 or later? Cheers, Ben I have come to believe that idealism without discipline is a quick road to disaster, while discipline without idealism is pointless. -- Aaron Ward (my brother)
Post #219,428 by drewk 8/15/05 5:42:03 PM Reply	Depends on which came first If the original work was v2 only, derivitives can not be v2 or later. If the original was v2 or later, someone can release a derivitive v2 only. That will create a fork, with anyone wanting those new changes constrained to v2 only, and anyone not needing those changes free to take the original work as v2 or later. OCIANAL === Purveyor of Doc Hope's [link\|http://DocHope.com\|fresh-baked dog biscuits and pet treats]. [link\|http://DocHope.com\|http://DocHope.com]
Post #219,430 by ben_tilly 8/15/05 5:48:36 PM Reply	Read atcroft's question again What you described was my impression as well. What atcroft pointed out is that if the original is v2 or later, then the GPL v2 requires that all original copyright notices be left intact. But if they are left intact, then you are distributing with a copyright notice that gives permission on your code that is v2 or later, which gets in the way of your intent to release v2 only. It is a subtle issue, but my thought (since confirmed as a first impression by someone who knows a lot more than me) was that keeping the notices intact is not the same as keeping the copyright statement intact. Therefore as long as your copyright statement includes a statement that you are including work from XXX, and keep the original copyright notices in the file (while making it clear that they're not your copyright notice), you can satisfy the GPL v2 and not have to apply the original copyright statement to your code. Cheers, Ben I have come to believe that idealism without discipline is a quick road to disaster, while discipline without idealism is pointless. -- Aaron Ward (my brother)

Welcome to IWETHEY!