Jan Engelhardt wrote:
It's mentioned in the preamble, but it is actually a part of the license
tag you put in your code. </nitpick>
Jan Engelhardt
Yep - and if it's in there it creates confusion. Anyhow - I just threw
the idea out there because even though the GPL2 has served the community
well there comes a point where if RMS has evolved into more f a
hinderence than a help to the cause and if he is going to dig in and be
unreasonable then the idea of forking the license becomes more
thinkable. I would feel more comfortable if say Larry Lessig of Creative
Commons in combination with perhaps with EFF we in charge of license
development. These are more trusted organization with serious legal
minds who can write a license that actually protects our interests in a
way that will hold up in courts.
So far the GPL2 is doing fine but it occasionally needs a little tweak
to make it more accurate. One of those tweaks is that the preamble lose
the "or later" clause.
Maybe RMS will get the message and realize that the Linux voice must be
heard and he will return to some kind of sanity on this. I don't think
it's time yet to fork the GPL but I think it's time to talk about the
possibility if GPL3 doesn't change. I think that GPL3 is so
substantially different than GPL2 that it should not have the same name.
So if GPL3 doesn't change then I vote fork.
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to [email protected]
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
[Index of Archives]
[Kernel Newbies]
[Netfilter]
[Bugtraq]
[Photo]
[Stuff]
[Gimp]
[Yosemite News]
[MIPS Linux]
[ARM Linux]
[Linux Security]
[Linux RAID]
[Video 4 Linux]
[Linux for the blind]
[Linux Resources]
