On Jan 19, 10 11:51:45 +0100, Joerg Schilling wrote:
Dave Plater
wrote: There's one aspect of ghostscript-8.70 that I don't quite know what to put in the License: part ghostscript-omni is built from Omni which is LGPLv2.1 or later. The gnu chart states that one is allowed to convert LGPLv2.1 or later into GPLv3 and from that I would understand that either all references to LGPLv2.1 must be removed or it's alright to simply put the licence in as GNUv3.
The LGPL is very obvious with claiming that such a change is unrevocable for the master copy of a distributor. So if a distributor _really_ makes such a change, it cannot ship at the same time any software that needs the library under LGPL.
I don't follow down that road. We don't need to have the concept of a master copy. A distributor can have identical copies of code in different packages with different license tags on it. Not very helpful, but perfectly legal. And: Whatever a packager says about the license, may not even be be the ultimate truth from an end-users perspective. Packager cannot revoke end-users rights either. cheers, JW- -- o \ Juergen Weigert paint it green! __/ _=======.=======_ <V> | jw@suse.de back to ascii! __/ _---|____________\/ \ | 0911 74053-508 __/ (____/ /\ (/) | _____________________________/ _/ \_ vim:set sw=2 wm=8 SUSE LINUX Products GmbH, GF: Markus Rex, HRB 16746 (AG Nuernberg) -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse-packaging+unsubscribe@opensuse.org For additional commands, e-mail: opensuse-packaging+help@opensuse.org