Licensing guidelines changes

[Tom "spot" Callaway]

On Thu, 2007-08-02 at 14:15 -0500, Jason L Tibbitts III wrote:
> >>>>> "JJ" == Jakub Jelinek <jakub at redhat.com> writes:
> 
> JJ> Shouldn't this be if you find the "or any later version" in all
> JJ> files with GPL (resp. LGPL) header?
> 
> I have the same question.  I'm doing a merge review of ypbind and it
> has:
> 
>    The ypbind-mt are 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.
> 
> in some of the source code, but also:
> 
> <!--  ypbind\-mt 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. -->
> 
> in the docbook manpage.  So what statement do we trust?  They both
> make blanket statements about the entire program.

Try to get upstream to clean this up.

If they don't, the source code trumps all. If the source code is
inconsistent, the most restrictive license wins (which would be "v2
only").

~spot