RFA: GPL2+exception -> GPL3+exception (Ada)

[Nick Clifton]

Hi Ralf,

> Is the wording mandated by the FSF somehow? 

Not sure.  I think that it is, but someone on the SC will have to give a 
definitive answer to that one.

>   * As a special exception under Section 7 of GPL version 3, you are granted *
>   * additional permissions described in the GCC Runtime Library Exception,   *
>   * version 3.1, as published by the Free Software Foundation. 
> 
> Because the thing I don't understand is why the GPLv3 hardcoded in here,
> rather than "v3 or, whichever later version you are using this under"?
> Except of course that "Section 7" might have to be reformulated somehow
> as "the section that allows Additional Terms" or so.  IANAL.

Plus of course this assumes that later versions do allow exceptions. 
You could postulate a theoretical case where a future version of the GPL 
withdraws all exceptions and then this clause would be completely 
unimplementable.

My take on this (given that I too am not a lawyer) is that *if* you have 
chosen to modify or redistribute the code under a future version of the 
GPL (without changing the licence notice in the source file), then you 
are implicitly changing the exception using clause to refer to this 
future version of the GPL as well.  ie if you are saying that file X is 
being distributed under the terms of the GPL v4 then you are also saying 
the the GCC Runtime Library Exception that applies to it is being used 
under the terms of the GPL v4 as well.

Mind you this raises another point - the wording in the exception clause 
makes no allowance for there being future versions of the GCC Runtime 
Library Exception. :-}

Cheers
   Nick