[Date Prev][Date Next] [Thread Prev][Thread Next] [Date Index] [Thread Index]

Re: GPL v2/v3 ?

On Fri, Mar 07, 2008 at 10:40:55PM +0100, Francesco Poli wrote:
> On Thu, 6 Mar 2008 09:38:21 +0100 Miriam Ruiz wrote:
> > There's another possibility: dual-licensing your code under the GPLv2
> > only and the GPLv3 only.
> You're right.  That would be the following case:
>  o  if you want to slightly enhance compatibility with existing
> licenses *and* you don't mind seeing your copyleft weakened by some
> clauses of the GNU GPL v3, *but* you don't trust the FSF to publish
> good future versions (v4, v5, ...) of the GNU GPL, then you may choose
> a "v2 or v3" approach

I would call splitting the corpus of GPL software into incompatible parts
something really bad.  What about a somewhat less paranoid option:  GPL2+noA
(GPL v2 or any higher, except for licenses from the Affero branch).

You would leave a loophole, but that's FSF not Microsoft...

1KB		// Microsoft corollary to Hanlon's razor:
		//	Never attribute to stupidity what can be
		//	adequately explained by malice.

Reply to: