Re: [PATCHv2] recipe licenses: update recipe LICENSE fields

[Denys Dmytriyenko <denis@denix.org>]

On Mon, Oct 11, 2010 at 08:53:41PM +0200, Frans Meulenbroeks wrote:
> 2010/10/11 Maupin, Chase <chase.maupin@ti.com>:
> >
> >> [...]
> >>
> >> > -LICENSE = "GPLv2"
> >> > +LICENSE = "GPLv2+"
> >>
> >> Doe we want this?
> >> I think most GPLv2 code carries the clause:
> >>
> >> "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."
> >>
> >> Yet currently virtually all of these have GPL or GPLv2 as LICENSE
> >
> > Frans,
> >
> > My original version of this patch was just changing GPL to GPLv2 for 
> > example.  But I was asked about whether it should be GPLv2+ which I guess 
> > is more indicative of the "or later" clause.  Does anyone have good 
> > guidance here on how to denote things that are GPLv2 only for now (like 
> > git which Linux has a note in the COPYING file about it being GPLv2) and 
> > things that are GPLv2 or later version?  I'm trying for consistency here 
> > but I guess there doesn't seem to be a set policy for how the LICENSE 
> > field should be set.
> 
> I have no personal preference, but was just noting the difference. How
> do others feel about thi?
> 
> BTW: please don't take this personal. I really appreciate you doing
> this, but I also am very aware that it is a boring and non-rewarrding
> job, so we should better aim at getting it right te first time.

Actually, it became a de facto standard in the community to differentiate 
between strict GPLv2 and "GPLv2 or later" (I guess we should thank GPLv3 for 
this...)

Googling for the "GPLv2+" term will show many OSS projects clarifying it this 
way. As well as many project catalogs and listings grouping by "GPLv2+" vs 
"GPLv2"...

In OE we've been using this term for some time now. Although, still too many 
old recipes use old notations, sometimes even as generic as just plain "GPL" 
w/o specifying the exact version. It wasn't as critical before, but these days 
OE is being adopted in corporate environments and proper licensing became 
quite important.

-- 
Denys