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 lot of harm to software development.
Sorting out the license issues on a big project is one big headache. In fact, I
created a ticket on Sage the other day to resolve issues of what platforms we
supported. Someone suggested I address the license too, as there was one
sentence originally on the document, which could perhaps need elaboration. I
agreed to do this, but then realised it opened up such a big can of worms, I
declined to do so.
> 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.
As I understand it, the "or later" causes is not actually a problem if you give
others the option of licensing it under any later revision. So if for example
you released your code under "GPL3 or later", and some time in the future the
GLP 4 said it was necessary to provide free 24/7 free technical support, *you*
would not need to provide 24/7 technical support - only the person that chose
to release your code GPL 4.
Dave