This is the mail archive of the
gcc@gcc.gnu.org
mailing list for the GCC project.
Re: RFH: GPLv3
> Bernd> I don't think that's true. Given that all copyrights are assigned to
> Bernd> the FSF, the FSF could license these changes as GPLv2+ (in 4.2) and
> Bernd> GPLv3+ (in 4.3 and up) without a problem. The original author's
> Bernd> wishes do not come into play.
>
> Wrong. The original author can license his or her own code to
> others using different licenses.
Yes, but the claim was somewhat the opposite: since any assignments on
file were done when GPLv2 was current, one could argue that the author
has ALREADY consented to release their code under both GPLv2 and GPLv3
without any further approval.
I agree with that as well, but also see the point that once the patch has
been placed into a GPLv3 file, it's quite unclear what license would
result from a "backport" of the patch: in some sense, you'd have to start
from the original (GPLv2) patch and apply it to the branch rather than a
more conventional "backport". What a mess!