incorrect copyright notice in 9 of 10 files

[sash-kan]

9 of 10 files, which includes copyright notice, contains incorrect text;
"published by the Free Software Foundation, version 3."

it must be:
"published by the Free Software Foundation, either version 3 of the License, or (at your option) any later version."

see text of license in the file COPYING or here: http://www.gnu.org/licenses/agpl-3.0.html

[Jelmer Vernooij (jelmer)]

As far as I understand, awsome is meant to be AGPL version 3 only, and not AGPL version 3 or later.

The COPYING file mentions this is possible as well:

Each version is given a distinguishing version number. If the
Program specifies that a certain numbered version of the GNU Affero General
Public License "or any later version" applies to it, you have the
option of following the terms and conditions either of that numbered
version or of any later version published by the Free Software
Foundation. If the Program does not specify a version number of the
GNU Affero General Public License, you may choose any version ever published
by the Free Software Foundation.

I'll fix up test_live.py, which is the only inconsistent file at the moment.

[sash-kan (alex-barakin)]

> As far as I understand, awsome is meant to be AGPL version 3 only, and not AGPL version 3 or later.

i hope you understand that this is a bad idea

[Tm_T (Jussi Kekkonen) (tmt)]

How that is a bad idea?

[John A Meinel (jameinel)]

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1

On 4/20/2012 1:04 PM, Jussi Kekkonen wrote:
> How that is a bad idea?
>

It is an explicit decision to use APGLv3 and not AGPLv3+, I'm not
specifically responsible for the license chosen, but that was the
decision.

John
=:->

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.4.9 (Cygwin)
Comment: Using GnuPG with Mozilla - http://enigmail.mozdev.org/

iEYEARECAAYFAk+RVuwACgkQJdeBCYSNAAN5JwCcDYfCXUMKJFl/1yya2Q2iNAwd
vaUAnRch/IITy7cgpzjmrZz197aPcE5U
=QFOR
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----

[sash-kan (alex-barakin)]

On Fri, Apr 20, 2012 at 11:04:24AM -0000, Jussi Kekkonen wrote:
> How that is a bad idea?

one phrase: possible incompatibility with programs under the new
versions of the license

more phrases: http://savannah.gnu.org/maintenance/GnuGplTwoOrLater
http://www.gnu.org/licenses/gpl-faq.en.html#VersionThreeOrLater

2 John A Meinel (jameinel)
very sad…

--
alexander barakin aka sash-kan | mailto+jid: <email address hidden>
mezon.ru,spb,russia | nic-handle: SASH3-UANIC