Is referencing the GPL in the package's README enough of a "license"?

[Ralf Corsepius]

On Fri, 2007-03-09 at 05:27 -0300, Alexandre Oliva wrote:
> On Mar  7, 2007, Peter Gordon <peter at thecodergeek.com> wrote:
> 
> > However, it contains no full license text, and the headers in the
> > source files only contain author/version informations. The only
> > reference to a license aside from what's on the website is that the
> > README file (which I include as %doc) contains the following line:
> 
> > 	License: GPL
> 
> > Is this reference enough,
> 
> IANAL.  It's enough for you to tell that you can use any version of
> the GPL, but it's not enough for you to be allowed to distribute the
> program without a copy of the GPL, because the GPL itself requires it
> to be included.
IANAL, IMO, this is an upstream-issue, because it's legally
irrelevant/legally not bind to _upstream_ whether a packager adds a copy
of the GPL or not.

Ralf