RFH: GPLv3

[David Edelsohn]

>>>>> Richard Kenner writes:

Richard> Now, suppose I apply it to the GPLv2 version of the file. One could argue
Richard> that such file is now GPLv3 and I think that'd be correct.  But since the
Richard> parts of the file being patched are identical, the patch is indistinguishable
Richard> from one that's derived from GPLv2 text.  This strikes me as a VERY murky
Richard> legal areas.

	I believe this scenario is exactly RMS's expectation if someone
other than the original author copies / backports a patch from a GPLv3
file.

David