On Tue, 17 Jan 2012 13:36:46 +0000 Gervase Markham wrote:
> On 13/01/12 21:31, Francesco Poli wrote:
> > Nonetheless, all the existing GPL-incompatibilities due to the MPL
> > v1.1, including the *unintentional* ones, won't be solved, except for
> > the cases where the copyright holders may be tracked down, and convinced
> > to explicitly enable the compatibility:
>
> How would you suggest distinguishing between intentional and
> unintentional, without tracking all the copyright holders down and
> asking their intentions? And, once you've tracked them down, you might
> as well ask permission for relicensing under plain MPL 2.
I admit that I cannot think of another way to distinguish between
intentional and unintentional incompatibilities.
It's unfortunate that a choice had to be made between
(A) fixing unintentional incompatibilities, while upsetting the
authors of intentional ones
and
(B) fulfilling the expectations of the authors of intentional
incompatibilities, while failing to fix unintentional ones
I understand why (B) was chosen, but it's unfortunate that no option
(C) could be devised... :-(
--
http://www.inventati.org/frx/frx-gpg-key-transition-2010.txt
New GnuPG key, see the transition document!
..................................................... Francesco Poli .
GnuPG key fpr == CA01 1147 9CD2 EFDF FB82 3925 3E1C 27E1 1F69 BFFE
Attachment:
pgpwh9EzRQIxy.pgp
Description: PGP signature