OSNews

But it is broken. GPLv3 fixes loopholes in v2 that can be used to escape both the letter and the spirit of the license by preventing people from sharing alike.

I fail to see how this can be seen as a bad thing, except by those who like the ability to circumvent v2.

So I'm not sure what Linus's objections to v2 are. I understand the practical difficulties of making all copyright holders for the kernel agree on the change, but he says they'll do it if Sun does it for Open Solaris. So it appears it's not such a big hurdle after all, and it can't be ideological since he's willing to be swayed by another's example.

Come to think about it, I wonder what makes Open Solaris so special that Linus is willing to follow it and only it on the GPLv3 issue. Why Open Solaris? How is it and Sun's stance relevant for Linux? I would've understood if he said "I'll do it if enough other big FOSS projects do it". Or "I'll ask the opinion of major Linux distro makers". But Open Solaris and Sun? Why? Because he thinks they'll never do it and thinks of it as an excuse along the lines of "when I see pigs fly"?

Open Solaris (or more completely, GNU/Solaris)
http://www.gnusolaris.org/gswiki

... is the only viable direct competitor to GNU/Linux if it were to be licensed under the GPL. It is not a competitor right now because the OpenSolaris kernel is licensed under the CCDL.

BSD is not a competitor because it is too susceptible to just being taken by some commercial entity with no "give back" obligation (*cough* darwin *cough*) ... so developers are not keen to see their supposed-to-be-open-code being used to rip people off.

There are, apparently by some estimates, the approximate equivalent of 1.5 million FOSS developers. Something over 60% of these release their code as GPL code ... there is a reason for this.

Anyway, if it were to be licensed under GPLv3, then OpenSolaris could include drivers from the Linux kernel project ... but the Linux kernel project under GPLv2 could not use anything back from OpenSolaris. That is probably the driver for Sun considering the GPLv3 in the first place. In order to remain competitive, Linus would have to move the Linux kernel to GPLv3.

Also, AFAIK, OpenSolaris is the only project that Linux actually wants something from. I think it is "zones" that he wants.

You're taking a highly cynical view with no basis whatsoever. Perhaps he's waiting for Sun to migrate Open Solaris to GPLv3 because if anyone is going to be encumbered by patents and copyrights, it's going to be Sun. Seeing how they make the move, learning from the difficulties they faced and perhaps seeing their motivation for such a move.

Fact of the matter is, GPLv2 works now. It's worked for the last 20 years or so. There is no reason to undertake a huge effort that will take hours of man power just to change something that has practically no visible benefit.

Well no you can't escape the letter of GPLv2. Some people argue that you can escape the spirit the FSF intended for the GPLv2 and that v3 fixes that.

Linus' counter is that he signed up to the letter of GPLv2 and not necessarily the spirit of the FSF. He doesn't think it is broken, since it allowes people to do exactly what he thought it would allow people to do. Linus obviously read the GPLv2 before licensing his code under it and was happy with what it allowed and didn't allow people to do with his code.



Actually Linus said no such thing. What he has said is that if Sun releases ZFS under GPLv3 then
"yes, maybe ZFS is worthwhile enough that I'm willing to go to the effort of trying to relicense the kernel. But quite frankly, I can almost guarantee that Sun won't release ZFS under the GPLv3 even if they release other parts. Because if they did, they'd lose the patent protection." In the same message he also says
"I think the only really interesting thing they have is ZFS, and even there, I suspect we'd be better off talking to NetApp, and seeing if they are interested in releasing WAFL for Linux."

Basically the only bit of Open Solaris that he is interested enough in to even to consider re-licensing is ZFS and even there he's skeptical.

He also goes on to say
"I think a truly open-source GPLv3 Solaris would be a really really _good_ thing, even if it does end up being a one-way street (from Linux to OpenSolaris) as far as code is concerned!"

Perhaps you should try looking up what someone actually said before you start putting words in their mouth.

They are only loopholes if you care about them being used. Obviously Linux doesn't and thus v2 is perfect for his needs.



He's practical. If SUN used GPLv3 it would be worth all the troubles to switch.