GPL upward compatibility?

[X39]

I am currently in the process of migrating my own server control panel for arma 3 games away from steamcmd due to various issues.

With this project effectively implementing all the necessary things to download depots directly, it would be the perfect fit for my project.

However, it is GPL 2 licensed with no specific information, if it is compatible with GPL2 only or GPL2 or higher, which is a problem to me, as I am pretty much a GPL3 guy.

So the question I wanted to ask is, whether integrating the code of this repository in a GPL3 licensed application is intended, or whether it is strictly GPL2

[yaakov-h]

paging @azuisleet

[azuisleet]

I think a GPL2+ license would keep the original intent and satisfy this, although that might still be a dual license. Do we want to contact any other contributors?

https://spdx.org/licenses/GPL-2.0-or-later.html

[yaakov-h]

Maybe notify all 21-or-so contributors and allow a few weeks for any objections?

[X39]

Dont want to be "that guy" but it has been a month and hence dropping a little reminder about this in

[azuisleet]

I have sent an email out to the contributors who I have email addresses for. The email asks for any objections to re-licensing as GPL 2+.

The rest of the contributors I will need to ping through GitHub:
@TheDS @Lifeismana @NicknineTheEagle @ProdigySim @js6pak @Margen67 @Gbps @tpill90 @eroen @SuNNjek @Surxe @gibbed

[tpill90]

No objections

[NicknineTheEagle]

No objections from me.

[SuNNjek]

No objections from me either

[Surxe]

No objections

[Margen67]

No objections.

[gibbed]

No objections from me.

[TheDS]

I have no problem with this either.

[ProdigySim]

I have no objections either

[asherkin]

No objections here either.

[azuisleet]

Double checking the LICENSE and the license header on our source files, we have
This file is subject to the terms and conditions defined in file 'LICENSE', which is part of this source code package.

while SPDX shows that GPL-2.0-only and GPL-2.0-or-later differ by the Standard License Header applied to each source file. Since we point to the license, the terms in the LICENSE do currently say "any later version".

If we are in agreement on which interpretation to use, should we update the license header in the files to match the Standard License Header?

[js6pak]

If the Program specifies a version number of this License which applies to it and(!) "any later version", you have the option of following the terms and conditions either of that version or of any later version published by the Free Software Foundation.

So afaik, it's only or-later when you specifically say so