2.6.8 licensing



On 11/19/10 11:45 AM, Dan wrote:
> On Wed, 27 Oct 2010, Camm Maguire wrote:
>
>> Greetings! The FSF has requested that we "change the software license
>> to GPLv3 or later, and the documentation license FDLv1.3 or later".

IMHO, the introduction of GPL3 has done a huge amount of harm to open-source 
software development. Sorting out the license issues on a big project is one big 
headache, with the GPL2/2+/3 issues being most of them.

Take a look at this matrix on the FSF site.

http://www.gnu.org/licenses/gpl-faq.html#AllCompatibility

it seems to be a minefield and a huge can or worms.

> When I release my own code, I always shy away from using those "or
> later" clauses. We have no idea what might be in a future version of
> the GPL or FDL, and therefore no idea what we're signing up to if we
> include those clauses.

I was very concerned about that too. I thought to myself what happens if the GPL 
4 says I have to provide 24/7 technical support for 1$/hour? Of course this is 
unlikely, but potentialy it could have conditions I really object to.

However, from what I understand, if I release code under the GPL 3, I can give 
*others* the option of releasing it under later revisions. So if they want to 
release it under GPL 4, and provide 24/7 technical support at $1/hour, that is 
their choice - I personally don't have to provide that support.

Personally, I would not accept the FSF's request, based on what harm they have 
done with introducing the GPL3, the less I have to do with them the better.



Dave