Re: [Savannah-hackers] savannah.gnu.org: submission of scsh-utils

[Anthony Carrico]

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1

Thank you for the quick reply. I added links to the licenses at my current
distribution site: http://memebeam.org/free-software/scsh-utils/. I would
prefer to use the GNU GPL V2 (at least until I read V3). I hope I can
still use Savannah for source control, etc. with this license. If the GNU
GPL V2 isn't acceptable for Savannah, you may use BSD (since the program
is dual licensed for compatiblity with scsh). 

Thanks again!
  Tony Carrico

On Tue, 22 Jan 2002, Guillaume Morin wrote:

> Dans un message du 21 jan \xE0 21:55, address@hidden \xE9crivait :
> 
> > Anthony Carrico <address@hidden> described the package as follows:
> > License: other
> > Other License: My project is dual licensed. It is covered by the GNU
> > General Public License V2, but since an scsh utility, it may also be
> > distributed under the scsh license (I guess that is bsd style). 
> > Package: scsh-utils
> > System name: scsh-utils
> > This package does NOT want to apply for inclusion in the GNU project
> 
> 
> You are not doing anything wrong by restricting to version 2 only of the
> GPL, and your software continues to be free software. However, the FSF
> doesn't want to accept that license in its hosts because it would be
> compatible with GPL v2, but wouldn't be compatible with the next
> version. And this is something that the FSF wants to discourage.  If you
> want to host your project in Savannah, you should change your license
> and either accept "GNU General Public License V2 or later" or any of the
> other GPL-compatible licenses and then register your project again.
> 
> Please keep in mind that if you decide to accept Savannah's policy of
> "GPL V2 or later", if a version 3 comes out nobody in Savannah would go
> and update the license information of your project; it would continue to
> be "GPL V2 or later" if you wanted it that way and it would not cause
> any conflicts for Savannah. And if a user wants to abide by the rules of
> V2, because he/she finds it better than V3, they can choose to do that.
> The copying permission statement gives them that option: "...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."
> 
> Futhermore, if you decide to change the license to GPLv2 or later,
> please indicate a link to the scsh license.
> 
> Regards,
> 
> -- 
> Guillaume Morin <address@hidden>
> 
>          Support the Debian GNU/Linux Project (http://www.debian.org/)
> 
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.0.6 (GNU/Linux)
Comment: For info see http://www.gnupg.org

iD8DBQE8TZ5esYhrnH7Qa1wRAuoXAJ93V7+MP4p8omZhcy8WGA0HMwTa6QCdHzBv
L4qIeaOqBhT0ZVDwcmU8Xl0=
=PV4B
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----