Re: GPLv2-only considered harmful [was Re: GnuTLS in Debian]
On Sat, Dec 28, 2013 at 08:53:56PM +0000, 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.
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.
Regards: David
--
/) David Weinehall <tao@debian.org> /) Rime on my window (\
// ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ // Diamond-white roses of fire //
\) http://www.acc.umu.se/~tao/ (/ Beautiful hoar-frost (/
Reply to: