Here's my $.02 ... First, as for my code, I'm happy releasing it under any version of the GPL and I actually encourage the group to move to GPLv3.
I would recommend that, upon making this move, we require that all submitters henceforth explicitly license under "GPLv3 or later" and we should change our COPYING file and source headers to reflect this fact. I believe that doing this covers us in the face of untimely deaths (and other situations in which copyright ownership becomes murky). If the code is licensed under this proviso, then it really doesn't matter who owns the copyright because we'll still perpetually retain the rights to use it, and relicense it, so long as we release under the GPL. (Hence, a foundation or copyright holding group isn't necessary, IMO.) As for our recently dear departed friend, I agree with what has been written already and I'm not certain how to proceed. Would it be possible to remove his stuff from the distribution until such time as we can speak to the family about it? Alternately, I think it may be okay to just go ahead and relicense his code and continue to use it based on the murkiness surrounding the "GPLv2 or later" issue and also the fact that I suspect his family will not be terribly concerned about it (what is it really worth anyway? If it was something of great value then I can see the family being concerned; but is it? Really?). There's also the fact that his act of releasing his code to the group implicitly acknowledges that he *intended* for the group to have it and to continue using it perpetually. IANAL, but I do know from my reading that *intent* figures heavily in the court room (at least in the US and I suspect in many other places as well). Lastly, I don't mean to be insensitive but, what exactly happened to HCl? It saddens me to learn of this, as it does whenever someone passes before his time, and I can't help my curiosity. If it can't be stated respectfully though then please ignore my inquiry. (Thanks.) ~ray