On 11/9/10 2:57 PM, Kim Weins wrote:
I think that we need to treat the v2 and later as a separate license in the
list. Although it would be nice from a purely technical point of view to
factor that into a conjunction or disjunction of two licenses, it is clear
just from the opinions on this list that doing so may cause some loss in
fidelity. Given the many differing opinions here, it seems leaving it as a
separate license would be the most conservative approach.
I also can't see any significant downside to making the "and later" as
different licenses except a very slight amount of overhead in having a
couple more licenses in the list.
If we did have a "GPLv2OrLaterVersion" license what would its license text be?