DKIM-Filter:	OpenDKIM Filter v2.11.0 delorie.com 45T8EbXo4035940
X-Authentication-Warning:	delorie.com: mail set sender to djgpp-bounces using -f
DKIM-Filter:	OpenDKIM Filter v2.11.0 delorie.com 45T8EaTb4035917
X-Recipient:	djgpp AT delorie DOT com
X-Yandex-Fwd:	1
X-Original-DKIM-Signature:	v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=yandex.ru; s=mail;
	t=1719648868; bh=iovpa+WfIbGzPuqKGPCLoJROJOPo/E0CTn7GbciB28U=;
	h=In-Reply-To:From:Date:References:To:Subject:Message-ID;
	b=PTuseMul/Ukxwz85SRjVcuWdEMgIEMx7Xv2D1BlTHSp2YAbUaRDxixDXaIVq5phBr
	EfLSchJljmvEctNcPnGcEkpN3EvDdjyivlem3ta8GWhZzRXRCJYn00JKy3X3Jkti0E
	oXp6NKDFJjU9GWhFO4+N6RNnnGuk1jHRIJiv6R70=
Authentication-Results:	mail-nwsmtp-smtp-production-main-25.sas.yp-c.yandex.net; dkim=pass header.i=@yandex.ru
Message-ID:	<1a852b91-d63f-43bc-84a1-2a497786b31e@yandex.ru>
Date:	Sat, 29 Jun 2024 11:14:26 +0300
MIME-Version:	1.0
User-Agent:	Mozilla Thunderbird
Subject:	Re: licensing questions
To:	"DJ Delorie (dj AT delorie DOT com) [via djgpp AT delorie DOT com]" <djgpp AT delorie DOT com>
References:	<xnzfr44x8w DOT fsf AT envy DOT delorie DOT com>
From:	"stsp (stsp2 AT yandex DOT ru) [via djgpp AT delorie DOT com]" <djgpp AT delorie DOT com>
In-Reply-To:	<xnzfr44x8w.fsf@envy.delorie.com>
Reply-To:	djgpp AT delorie DOT com
Errors-To:	nobody AT delorie DOT com
X-Mailing-List:	djgpp AT delorie DOT com
X-Unsubscribes-To:	listserv AT delorie DOT com

28.06.2024 23:40, DJ Delorie (dj AT delorie DOT com) [via djgpp AT delorie DOT com] wrote:
> I'm not opposed to clarifying copying.dj to have the usual "or any later
> version" text, though.

OK, I actually have also found this
wording in LGPL:
https://www.gnu.org/licenses/lgpl-3.0.ru.html
```

If the Library as you received it does not specify a version number of 
the GNU Lesser General Public License,
you may choose any version of the GNU Lesser General Public License ever 
published by the Free Software
Foundation.

```

Together with your note above, I think
it is sufficient for me to proceed with
"or any later version", even before you
add the clarification (but it would still
help if you do).


>    Note that such a change would still not give you
> the right to change the license, just more flexibility in complying with
> it.
Understood, thanks.

- Raw text -