Re: Plan to release a gplv3 compliant debian-based release
On Wed, Jul 03, 2013 at 09:17:48PM +0200, Svante Signell wrote:
> On Tue, 2013-07-02 at 15:32 -0700, John H. Robinson, IV wrote:
> > Svante Signell wrote:
> > >
> > > I've been thinking about this for some time now. There is a need for a
> > > gplv3+-compliant Debian-based distribution! Meaning that gplv2 only code
> > > will not be included! For kernels, kFreeBSD and Hurd will remain, and
> > > Linux will be several years back of course. Anybody has an idea on how
> > > old Linux kernel will remain? Comments, ideas, any takers? Criticism I
> > > assume will be plenty. Maybe even FSF might help here.
> > Good luck with the Linux kernel...
> > commit 625a8e113925b0bf958e7a4a05b91663908530a1
> > Author: linus1 <email@example.com>
> > Date: Sat Sep 5 11:00:00 1992 -0800
> > [PATCH] Linux-0.97.3 (September 5, 1992)
> > Hey, we switched to the GPL several months ago, but only now do we
> > include the license text itself. Apparently everybody expected
> > everybody else to just know what the GPL was..
> > Exactly when the switch over took place is left as an exercise for
> > reader. Since it was over a decade ago, I seriously doubt anyone would
> > use anything that ancient as a basis for a modern kernel.
> The interesting thing is not when Linus used the GPL license the first
> time, it was v2 by then. Of crucial interest is when Linus changed from
> v2 or later to v2 only. And looking at the source code, e.g. 3.9.8, a
> very lot of files are still v2+, not v2 only. That's a very big
Kind regards, David Weinehall
/) David Weinehall <firstname.lastname@example.org> /) Rime on my window (\
// ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ // Diamond-white roses of fire //
\) http://www.acc.umu.se/~tao/ (/ Beautiful hoar-frost (/