Kumar Appaiah <a.ku...@alumni.iitm.ac.in> writes: > Pardon me if I miss something, but is it prudent to alter upstream's > license without their permission in the source? Granted, it's just an > address change which may not change the constraints and restriction > imposed by the license itself, but I wonder if this would actually be > the right thing to do, rather than have upstream fix it.
I don't think the address is part of the license. The whole license statement is something like: 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. This program is distributed in the hope that it will be useful, but WITHOUT ANY WARRANTY; without even the implied warranty of MERCHANTABILITY or FITNESS FOR A PARTICULAR PURPOSE. See the GNU General Public License for more details. You should have received a copy of the GNU General Public License along with this program. If not, you can find it on the World Wide Web at http://www.gnu.org/copyleft/gpl.html, or write to the Free Software Foundation, Inc., 51 Franklin St, Fifth Floor, Boston, MA 02110-1301, USA. The first two paragraphs establish the license, and are normative. The third paragraph isn't normative. It doesn't affect the terms and conditions of the work; it's just a pointer to where you can find the complete license. -- Russ Allbery (r...@debian.org) <http://www.eyrie.org/~eagle/> -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-mentors-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: http://lists.debian.org/8739klyfs2....@windlord.stanford.edu