is BFG "GPLv3" or "GPL v3 or any later version"?

[dmgerman]

There is a bit of inconsistency in terms of what license BFG is licensed under. The headers of the files indicate "GPL version 3 or any later version". However, the contributing guidelines ask the developer to contribute to the project using the GPL-v3.

See: https://github.com/rtyley/bfg-repo-cleaner/blob/master/CONTRIBUTING.md and https://github.com/rtyley/bfg-repo-cleaner/blob/master/bfg/src/main/scala/com/madgag/git/bfg/cli/CLIConfig.scala

The inconsistency might lead to difficulties if one day the project decides to move to a newer version of the GPL.

[javabrett]

I don't see a problem. The source file header just means that if GPL v4 is released at some time, I have the option of licensing BFG using v3 or v4, at my discretion. So there would be s choice at that time.

The author is placing trust in future versions of the license.

[dmgerman]

The issue is that the patches are licensed (implicitly) under the GPLv3 (only), not GPLv3+, as BFG.

so the patches will not be able to upgrade.

--dmg

On Tue, May 2, 2017 at 12:35 AM, Brett Randall notifications@github.com wrote:

I don't see a problem. The source file header just means that if GPL v4 is released at some time, I have the option of licensing BFG using v3 or v4, at my discretion. So there would be s choice at that time.

The author is placing trust in future versions of the license.

— You are receiving this because you authored the thread. Reply to this email directly, view it on GitHub https://github.com/rtyley/bfg-repo-cleaner/issues/214#issuecomment-298528654, or mute the thread https://github.com/notifications/unsubscribe-auth/AAKM8KjZ8pr3paHaI0UpFE2wgJAummHQks5r1tzWgaJpZM4NNrO1 .

-- --dmg

---

Daniel M. German http://turingmachine.org

[rtyley]

the patches are licensed (implicitly) under the GPLv3

...actually, you, as a contributor, don't license the patch. See https://github.com/rtyley/bfg-repo-cleaner/blob/master/CONTRIBUTING.md (from FSF's guidance):

To achieve this, contributors should only provide contributions which are their own work, and either:

a) Assign the copyright on the contribution to myself, Roberto Tyley

or

b) Disclaim copyright on it and thus put it in the public domain

Please specify which option you want to use when creating your pull request.

So you either make the content public domain, disclaiming copyright, or you give me all rights over it, allowing me to assign whatever license I like to your patch. In neither case are you (the contributor) assigning a license to the patch.

I'll assign whatever license I choose - for the entirety of the BFG source code I release that under "GPL v3 or above".