[svlug] Possible GPL v. 3 licence terms
kevin at ank.com
Thu Apr 26 12:27:11 PDT 2001
> Interestingly, GPL3 would be enough of a change, that (for largish
> projects) it would be impossible to migrate from GPL2 to GPL3 without
> a complete from-scratch clean-room'ed rewrite. (since the GPL3
> "public use" clause is more restrictive than GPL2, any contributor to
> GPL2 software would have to be consulted before the "package" license
> could be changed).
If they followed the FSF boilerplate then their code is probably
already licensed under GPL v2 or (optionally) any later revision.
> >Does it strike anyone else as ironic that people piss and moan about what a
> >bunch of commies Free Software people are, and then piss and moan when these
> >Free Software people won't let them use their work without compensation?
> >(i.e., compensation meaning conforming to a very generous license)
> I don't see that a license that says "if you tweak this for your own
> environment, you need to distribute your changes" as "generous" in
> any sense of the word.
I think you are being needlessly pedantic. I can't imagine anyone
having a problem with you telling them that you are running Foo with
the Bar patches; go get it from the source.
More information about the svlug