David Starner wrote: > Peter S Galbraith wrote: > > Darren Benham wrote: > > > The most recent version of Lyx had a license change (I am told) for the > > > very same reason. > > > > No. The current version has had a _clarification_ added, but is > > still very much GPLed (without additional clauses). See the > > Debian package or http://www.lyx.org/license.html > > I do see. But it's not GPL'ed. The clarification makes that very clear, > IMO. The clarification is an addendum to the license and changes the > terms of the license ("The terms of the GPL apply save where they > conflict with this statement.")
I disagree. They explicitely state that they have always used the GPL, and that, legally, any clause that are inapplicable are rejected, whether they add a clarification paragraph or not. As they say: `This is *not* a change of license, but a clarification of the license that LyX has always used.' > If the author changes xwatch's > license in the same way that lyx's was changed, then Debian should be > satisfied. Better yet, if there is only one author, change the license > to LGPL or MPL or something else. I'm happy to wait for the dust to settle and for a concensus to be reached on what the best GPL add-on statement would be. I don't want to request a change of license more than once, and I think clarity would benefit everyone. Peter