Re: GPLv2-only considered harmful [was Re: GnuTLS in Debian]
On 12/28/2013 03:53 PM, Clint Adams wrote:
> On Sat, Dec 28, 2013 at 09:45:09AM +0100, David Weinehall wrote:
>> As one of the "GPL v2 only" proponents, I take affront. I choose to
>> license what little software I release as GPL v2 only because I do not
>> consider the GPL v3 to have what attracted me to use the GPL v2 in the
>> first place.
>
> The only theoretical advantage I see to GPLv2 is in the termination
> clause, and in practice that seems to be really more trouble than
> it's worth.
>
> Beyond that you have substandard and unclear wording, tivoization,
> lesser patent protection, and incompatibility with Apache 2.0.
>
> So what about that is attractive, and what about v3 is so intolerable
> that you cannot abide your software being distributed under it or
> combined with v3+ works?
There are organization who will allow v2 but not v3 because of the tivoizaton and patent clauses. A developer may want
his work to be used by such organizations as well as by Debian.
--
Stephen M. Webb <stephen.webb@bregmasoft.ca>
Reply to: