Am Montag, den 07.02.2011, 16:54 -0500 schrieb Tom Callaway:
On 02/07/2011 04:06 PM, Richard Fontana wrote:
> On Mon, Feb 07, 2011 at 03:59:12PM -0500, Tom Callaway wrote:
>> On 02/07/2011 03:52 PM, Richard Fontana wrote:
>>> Maybe it's only
>>> practical for Fedora to label this as "GPLv2 or GPLv3", and if in
the
>>> distant future the KDE organization also approved GPLv4 the license
>>> tag could just be updated accordingly (much like any special license
>>> change might be treated). Look to spot for the official answer though.
>>
>> I think this is sensible. Handle it like this:
>>
>> # KDE e.V. may determine that future GPL versions are accepted
>> License: GPLv2 and GPLv3
>
> Shouldn't it be "GPLv2 or GPLv3"? It's like a (disjunctive) dual
> license.
Yes, you're right. It is a Monday.
# KDE e.V. may determine that future GPL versions are accepted
License: GPLv2 or GPLv3
~tom
Thanks to both of you for the quick clarification! :)