[svlug] Possible GPL v. 3 licence terms

[kevin@ank.com]

Hi, 

Well...

> 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.

Cheers,
-kls