Licensing of Mercurial: "GPL" (any), "GPLv2" or "GPLV2 or later"?

[Matt Mackall]

On Mon, 2008-08-04 at 06:17 +0200, Arne Babenhauserheide wrote:
> Am Samstag 02 August 2008 14:20:19 schrieb Adrian Buehlmann:
> > Since there is no term "any later version" stated anywhere in the sources
> > *and* http://selenic.com/repo/index.cgi/hg/file/cbdfd08eabc9/COPYING is GPL
> > v2, it's GPL v2 only.
> 
> Sorry for nitpicking, but licensing issues are where I prefer to nitpick 
> instead of being picked and downed later on... 
> 
> As far as I understand it, only linking to a GPLv2 doesn't make a statement 
> about the GPL version you support, only that the GPLv2 is the text you give 
> the users. 

Be warned: anyone who takes Arne's license advice over mine can expect
to deal with my lawyers with no help from Arne's.

Some small components of Mercurial (especially those borrowed from other
sources) are licensed under the GPLv2+ in deference to their authors'
original wishes. The bulk are GPLv2 only. Thus the only license that's
valid for the combined work is GPLv2.

Please, folks, don't make me respond to an endless thread about
licenses, it's keeping me from doing useful work. 

-- 
Mathematics is the supreme nostalgia of our time.