maxima license clarification: "GPLv2" or "GPLv2 or later" or ??

As I see it the main problem we could have is that GPL2 and GPL3 are
not compatible licenses. The windows binary includes some programs and
header files from gcc - if gcc becomes GPL3 (very likely), then this
could cause problems. I think this is something we should think about.

Andrej

On 8/10/07, Robert Dodier <robert.dodier at gmail.com> wrote:
> On 8/9/07, Rex Dieter <rdieter at math.unl.edu> wrote:
>
> > With the GPLv3 having been recently released, could someone place clarify
> > what version(s) of the GPL applies to current release(s) of maxima?
>
> Disclaimer: I am not a lawyer.
>
> I believe that different bits of Maxima are governed by slightly
> different licenses.
>
> (1) Everything released by Bill Schelter and derivatives of that
> (i.e. edited or otherwise modified copies) is covered by the
> license Schelter attached to Maxima, namely GPL v2.
> See: http://maxima.cvs.sourceforge.net/maxima/maxima/COPYING
> I don't believe Schelter used the phrase "v2 or later"
> so I believe we cannot change the license of that part of Maxima to
> GPL v2 or later (short of getting agreement from whoever
> inherited Schelter's copyrights).
>
> (2) Some original works written by other authors are covered
> by other licenses as specified by their authors.
> Some authors have specified GPL v2 or later,
> and some have specified LGPL v2 or later, and at least one
> is covered by LGPL + a Lisp-specific preamble.
> It is possible there are some files covered by still other
> licenses; I haven't looked carefully.
>
>
> Given this situation, I believe that an executable is covered
> by the intersection of the licenses of the pieces, which I
> believe would be GPL in the case of Maxima.
> In a release of source code only, I believe each piece would
> be covered by its own license.
>
> Of course I could easily be mistaken about any or all of this.
>
> Rex, perhaps you can tell us what you want to do and then
> we can discuss whether that particular action is allowed
> under the license or licenses of Maxima. I think that would
> be more productive than a discussion of licensing in the abstract.
>
> best
> Robert Dodier
> _______________________________________________
> Maxima mailing list
> Maxima at math.utexas.edu
> http://www.math.utexas.edu/mailman/listinfo/maxima