Re: Licence question
SL Baur writes:
Jan Vroonhof <vroonhof(a)math.ethz.ch> writes in
xemacs-beta(a)xemacs.org:
> The XEmacs info files still have the GPL v1 as the first node. Is that
> intentional?
What difference does it make so long as it is GPL?
The source code references v2, so we should ship that or change
the refences back to v1.
As I recall, GPL v2 just contained some clarification of v1
licensing terms. I think the "mere aggregation" clause was adedd
in v2, after people wondered whether bundling GPL'd software
would infect a whole distribution.