Re: GPLv2-only considered harmful [was Re: GnuTLS in Debian]
On Sun, Dec 29, 2013 at 03:50:06AM +0100, David Weinehall wrote:
> Apart from the termination clause, the GPLv2 is far more concise,
> I don't see tivoization as a problem (it's the software I want to
> protect, not anyone's combination of it with hardware), nor do I care
> about compatibility with Apache 2.0 -- I do, however, care about
> compatibility with GPL v2, which GPL v3 isn't.
So your doomsday scenario is that if you license something
GPLv2+, someone might fork and modify it to be GPLv3+, and
then someone else with a different doomsday scenario can't
incorporate those modifications into GPLv2-only software?
Reply to: