Re: GPL v3? Other license options?

[MJ Ray <..hidden..>]

"Chris Travers" <..hidden..> wrote:
> [...] I am right that Debian considers the GPL v3 to be a license whose
> use allows but does not ensure that the software meets the DFSG?

That's my understanding of it.

> Wouldn't
> the GPL v3 make our job in complying with these guidelines harder because we
> would have to review optional terms of all dependencies under the GPL v3?

Yes.  We also get to watch the early adopters for problems, like we
did with the FDL.

> Is that a good use of core time?  There are thus compelling reasons *not* to
> upgrade the license.  I just don't want to be forced to do so.

Time to make sure developers are talking to upstream developers!

Best wishes,
-- 
MJ Ray - see/vidu http://mjr.towers.org.uk/email.html
Experienced webmaster-developers for hire http://www.ttllp.co.uk/
Also: statistician, sysadmin, online shop builder, workers co-op.
Writing on koha, debian, sat TV, Kewstoke http://mjr.towers.org.uk/