Can GPLv3 packages be synced?

[David Kastrup]

"Stephen J. Turnbull" <stephen at xemacs.org> writes:

> Mats Lidell writes:
>
>  > How will the board go about the GPLv3 issue?
>
> Thanks to Michael Albinus, we have an opinion from the FSF Copyright
> clerk.  Basically, it's complex but under some circumstances we can
> distribute packages under GPLv3 without relicensing either other
> packages or the core XEmacs.  The main consideration, I think, is
> political: what Richard Stallman will think.  I doubt he'll like it
> very much.

Richard does not like the whole XEmacs project very much.  So that's
not much of a point.  One just wants to avoid constellations where he
feels he could or should do something about that.

> I don't really think we have much choice, but we do need to check
> that everything can be promoted to GPLv3, and do something about
> anything that can't be promoted.

At least it would seem from what you report from Michael that the time
frame for doing that has gotten somewhat more relaxed.

> Footnotes: 
> [1]  If you've assigned to the FSF, you may need to notify them, but
> all assignments I've seen require the FSF to either license as you
> request, or give you permission to "use as you see fit."

My opinion, too.

-- 
David Kastrup, Kriemhildstr. 15, 44793 Bochum