Florian Weimer fw@deneb.enyo.de writes:
I'm glad to see that one of the most-violated clauses of the GPLv2 is gone, namely:
a) You must cause the modified files to carry prominent notices stating that you changed the files and the date of any change.Great, thanks. But one ambiguity in version 2 still remains: are anonymous changes allowed, or must the authors and copyright holders be identified?
The replacement text is:
a) The work must carry prominent notices stating that you modified it, and giving a relevant date.
So they've removed the requirement that "the modified files" contain notices that they've been changed, and have replaced this with a more relaxed requirement that "the work" has to contain such notices.
It looks like anonymous changes are not allowed. If they were, the licence should use the words "stating that it was modified", rather than saying "that you modified", but you're right that this isn't clear, so I've added a comment to the draft about this.