Re: [Bug-gnubg] Somewhat outdated GPL license notices

[Russ Allbery]

Michael Petch <address@hidden> writes:
> On 21/07/2013 7:59 PM, Russ Allbery wrote:

>> "either version 3 or later of the License, or (at your option) any
>> later version,"

> I agree that source files without a GPL header should have them added. I
> haven't counted how many fall into this category. I (and other
> developers) can fix this when time permits. As for the unusual wording
> above, I couldn't even find it in any of the GPLv3's drafts so not sure
> how it made it into the code base. It should read:

> "either version 3 of the License, or (at your option) any later version."

It looked like it was specific to the files that were originally LGPL and
were relicensed, and I suspect it was just an accident of rewording the
license notice instead of copying and pasting the regular GPLv3 license
statement.

Thank you for your quick review!

As soon as I have a moment, I'm going to work on a patch that lets gnubg
search in $localstatedir/lib/$PACKAGE as well as $pkgdatadir for files and
submit it for review.  That will let me drop the last Debian-specific
modifications to the package.

I just uploaded 1.01.003-1 to Debian unstable.  Sorry about how
embarassingly long it took me to upload the package.  Thank you so much
for the regular versioned release!  It makes the packaging process a lot
easier.

-- 
Russ Allbery (address@hidden)             <http://www.eyrie.org/~eagle/>