Linked by Tony Steidler-Dennison on Mon 28th Jul 2008 17:32 UTC, submitted by zaboing
Oracle and SUN In an interview with derStandard.at, Novell developer Michael Meeks talks mostly about Sun's lack of openness in regards to OpenOffice.org. He goes as far as stating that if Sun dropped out of OOo-development this "wouldn't be an entirely negative thing". He also goes on to talk about promoting Go-oo instead, and emphasizes the importance of breaking down the barriers between GNOME and KDE.
Thread beginning with comment 324864
To view parent comment, click here.
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
RE[6]: Not news
by elsewhere on Tue 29th Jul 2008 04:09 UTC in reply to "RE[5]: Not news"
elsewhere
Member since:
2005-07-13

By default, every GPL version contains the "or any later version" clause. Only very few FOSS projects (*cough* Linux *cough*) do not contain the "any later version" clause but that's mostly due personal conflicts with certain FSF members (Torvalds vs. Stallman).


OMFG, people are still spewing this? The GPL *never* contained an "or later" clause. It was contained in the boilerplate as a *recommendation*. Copyright holders still had to specifically state the "or later" clause, which very many didn't. This has been discussed and debated ad nauseum, please visit the interwebs a little more often to keep up to date.

Reply Parent Score: 3

RE[7]: Not news
by KAMiKAZOW on Tue 29th Jul 2008 07:25 in reply to "RE[6]: Not news"
KAMiKAZOW Member since:
2005-07-06

The GPL *never* contained an "or later" clause. It was contained in the boilerplate as a *recommendation*. Copyright holders still had to specifically state the "or later" clause, which very many didn't.

That's splitting hairs. I know what a boilerplate is but I wanted to keep my post simple.
To be exact:
The GPL includes a boilerplate for "About" windows and README files and that one has "any later version". If no GPL version is explicitly stated, then any GPL version may be used.

It's true that there are/were other FOSS projects that include(d) GPLv2-only code. The most prominent example is probably KDE. But -- unlike Linus who refuses to compromise on license compatibility with other projects -- the KDE project had a lengthy process to ensure that past GPLv2-only code is relicensed and all future KDE code is GPLv3 compatible. See http://techbase.kde.org/Policies/Licensing_Policy for KDE's current policy.

Reply Parent Score: 3