Linked by Thom Holwerda on Wed 28th Mar 2007 21:02 UTC, submitted by Ali Davoodifar
GNU, GPL, Open Source The FSF has released the third draft of the revised third version of the GNU General Public License. Some of the changes in the new draft, such as the increased clarification and legal language, or the housekeeping changes that reflect new aspects of the license are likely to be accepted. However, the license also includes a new approach to the controversial issue of lock-down technologies as well as more explicit language about patents, including language designed to prevent a re-occurrence of agreements such as the one that Novell entered into with Microsoft - all of which is apt to kindle heated debate as the revision process enters its final stages after fifteen months of intensive work.
Thread beginning with comment 225471
To view parent comment, click here.
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
RE: Let's see
by sbergman27 on Wed 28th Mar 2007 22:45 UTC in reply to "Let's see"
Member since:

The license sucks for the very fact that it has pretty much split the community and will continue to do so after its release.

It hasn't even gotten started yet. The *real* damage starts after its release date, when the division of the community goes from being a concept, which can be repaired, to being a matter of law, which can't.

Edited 2007-03-28 22:46

Reply Parent Score: 4

RE[2]: Let's see
by jessta on Thu 29th Mar 2007 00:32 in reply to "RE: Let's see"
jessta Member since:

when you refer to 'division of the community' what are you talking about?

Are you refering to the fact that GPLv3 won't be compatiable with GPLv2?
- This hasn't been a problem in the past with many licences not being GPLv2 compatible.(eg. BSD)

This won't be a problem because developers who originally released their software under GPLv2 wanted to enforced continued freedom in the use of the code they write(otherwise they would have chosen something like BSD Licence). GPLv3 will continue this enforcement while pluging up some holes in GPLv2, so I can't see why many projects wouldn't relicense if they can.

For those to value freedom in there software I can't see the GPLv3 really changing much.

Reply Parent Score: 5

RE[2]: Let's see
by dylansmrjones on Thu 29th Mar 2007 21:12 in reply to "RE: Let's see"
dylansmrjones Member since:

What division? There is going to be no division here. It is for all matters just another license. GCC can go GPL3 and the Linux kernel can stay GPL2 and whatever package can stay as it is.

Reply Parent Score: 2