> -----Original Message----- > From: openembedded-devel-boun...@lists.openembedded.org > [mailto:openembedded-devel-boun...@lists.openembedded.org] On Behalf Of > Denys Dmytriyenko > Sent: Wednesday, October 20, 2010 2:03 PM > To: openembedded-devel@lists.openembedded.org > Subject: Re: [oe] [PATCHv2] recipe licenses: update recipe LICENSE fields > > On Wed, Oct 20, 2010 at 08:57:01PM +0200, Andreas Oberritter wrote: > > On 10/20/2010 08:37 PM, Denys Dmytriyenko wrote: > > > On Wed, Oct 20, 2010 at 01:27:54PM -0500, Maupin, Chase wrote: > > >>> Chase, > > >>> > > >>> Does it say what kind of exception it is? If it has a name, it's > better to > > >>> specify it. For libgcc/libstdc++ I ended up specifying "GPLv3 with > GCC > > >>> RLE", > > >>> which stands for GCC Runtime Library Exception: > > >> > > >> Denys, > > >> > > >> The COPYING.EXCEPTION file has the title "AUTOCONF CONFIGURE SCRIPT > > >> EXCEPTION". Would you like this changed to "GPLv3 with Autoconf > CSE"? > > > > > > Chase, > > > > > > Either "GPLv3 with Autoconf CSE" or even "GPLv3 with Autoconf > Configure > > > Script Exception"... I'm not sure CSE is as common as RLE - here's the > > > list of current GNU exceptions: > > > > GCC and Autoconf both being GNU projects, their license is probably not > > GPLv3, but GPLv3+ (with some exception), in the discussed notation. ;-) > > Interesting point! We should try to be future-proof with GPLv3+ too :) > Although I haven't seen anyone using it this way, as it's not relevant yet.
I'll make it GPLv3+ since I do see some "or later" comments. > > -- > Denys > > _______________________________________________ > Openembedded-devel mailing list > Openembedded-devel@lists.openembedded.org > http://lists.linuxtogo.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openembedded-devel _______________________________________________ Openembedded-devel mailing list Openembedded-devel@lists.openembedded.org http://lists.linuxtogo.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openembedded-devel