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
Content-Language: en-US
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>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Reply-To: djgpp AT delorie DOT com
Errors-To: nobody AT delorie DOT com
Precedence: bulk

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.