[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: [gNewSense-users] GPLv2 and GPLv3 incompatible (was: Trademarks In g
Re: [gNewSense-users] GPLv2 and GPLv3 incompatible (was: Trademarks In gNewSense...)
Wed, 14 Nov 2007 11:48:48 -0500
This isnt' a problem YET, but I'm sure at some point we WILL see it.
Take, for instance, FSF's libreadline that is currently licensed under
v2 or later. I'm of the understanding that GNU Project applications
will be rolled to the v3 as time goes by. This will make newer
versions of libreadline incompatible with ANY v2 (only) application
that used it.
This means those applications will not be able to take advantage of
the newer improvements, but it ALSO means that to comply with the
license distros like gNewSense will have to eventually drop v2 only
applications or maintain OLDER versions of Libreadline that didn't
used the "or later" clause. With the several possible solutions it
will just mean we've got to be extra dilligent because as it is now
we're used to working with "the GPL" but what is GPL today may NOT be
compatible with other GPL software come Hardy or whatever comes later.
At this point, there's no reason for this to be anything other than an
exercise in license symantics; I'd like to hold off the accusations of
spreading FUD and/or rumours.
On Nov 14, 2007 11:36 AM, Markus Laire <address@hidden> wrote:
> Kevin Dean wrote:
> > Joerg pointed something else out to me that we REALLY need to look
> > into when gNewSense 2.0 comes around.
> > There are a BUNCH of applications that have GPLv2 or later and some
> > projects will upgrade to version 3. However, 2 and three are
> > incompatible, (like the CDDL and GPL) and some upgrades might actually
> > make the software undistributable in binary form. :P
> Isn't that a problem only for "GPLv2 only" applications, and not for
> "GPLv2 or later" applications?
> Since GPLv3 is included in "GPLv2 or later", I don't think "GPLv2 or
> later" can be incompatible with GPLv3.
> Markus Laire