| 1 |
> -----Original Message----- |
| 2 |
> From: b.n. [mailto:brullonulla@×××××.com] |
| 3 |
> Sent: Wednesday, July 18, 2007 6:29 PM |
| 4 |
> To: gentoo-user@l.g.o |
| 5 |
> Subject: Re: [gentoo-user] 2 to 3?? |
| 6 |
> |
| 7 |
> |
| 8 |
> Personally I'm quite happy with both GPLv2 and GPLv3. |
| 9 |
> Frankly, my only |
| 10 |
> real, serious concern is the fact that the two licences are |
| 11 |
> incompatible. |
| 12 |
> |
| 13 |
> The fact compatibility has not explicitly allowed sounds |
| 14 |
> plain crazy to |
| 15 |
> me. |
| 16 |
> |
| 17 |
> When I tried asking about how to have some degree of compatibility |
| 18 |
> between GPLv2 and GPLv3 in code I write, everyone told me |
| 19 |
> "just license it under GPLv2 or any later version". The problem |
| 20 |
> is that in this case I have to blindly trust the FSF about anything |
| 21 |
> that will come out of it. |
| 22 |
> |
| 23 |
|
| 24 |
That honestly is the only real way to make them compatible, |
| 25 |
to use the "or any later version" clause. |
| 26 |
|
| 27 |
Version 3 only allows for very specific modifications to itself. |
| 28 |
Version 2 was a little more forgiving. |
| 29 |
|
| 30 |
Version 3 says "Here is a list of optional clauses." |
| 31 |
|
| 32 |
There are other options, but they make it into a new license. |
| 33 |
-- |
| 34 |
gentoo-user@g.o mailing list |
Archives