Re: Please, no GitHub

[Riccardo Mottola]

Hi,

while this is getting a GPL discussion, and thus a bit off-topic, it 
hits a sore point.

Gregory Casamento wrote:
> I'm wondering where you get this impression.  GPLv3 is not being
> avoided by any means:
<cut>

GPLv3 is being laregely adopted, however "being avoided" is also true: 
not in terms of programs using it, but in terms of Projects and people 
actively rejecting stuff in GPLv3.

One of the Clang vs GCC discussion points is a license problem: the BSD 
people actively reject stuff in the core system if GPLv3!
Not my point debating why, I never understood it fully, but it is so. 
Companies and others have a similar attitude.

Just a couple of weeks ago I have been contacted off-list to change the 
license of certain GNUstep applications. I replied with a clear no, but 
the "question" or "problem" still remains for certain people.
> A person is entitled to their own opinion, but not to their own facts.
> The fact of the matter is, GPLv3 is extremely relevant when it comes
> to fighting patents as well as many other things.   While I,
> personally, am no fan of it's incompatibility with GPLv2 (as it
> adversely impacts some GNUstep apps due to those authors being
> unwilling to re-license or even add a "or later") I do understand what
> it's purpose is and why it's important.   So, please, don't lie to
> yourself or spread misinformation about it being a "thing of the past"
> as it certainly isn't.

The incompatibility is sadly a problem and I would have preferred the 
FSF being more cautious there. It creates problems with distributions 
like it happened in Debian.
Two important pieces of code which do not have the "later" clause can't 
be re-licensed because they are not under the GNUstep umbrella, so it is 
not a problem of the "authors being unwilling".
I also may add that in one case, as we discussed in Dublin, there is a 
new library being dual-licensed with the or-later clause but the changes 
are so significant that I was up to now able to adopt it.
But now we are really going off-topic. These license issues are 
important though because they impact both the audience programs reach as 
well as potential exploitation, they shouldn't be dismissed easily.

Riccardo