Linus on GPLv3 and ZFS
Linus on GPLv3 and ZFS
Posted Jun 13, 2007 13:09 UTC (Wed) by job (guest, #670)In reply to: Linus on GPLv3 and ZFS by man_ls
Parent article: Linus on GPLv3 and ZFS
Maaaybe there was a good reason why the FSF recommended the use of "v2 or later" licensing. Then you basically leave the choice to the user. I never understood what Linus didn't like about that, except some unspecified fear of the FSF, which would be not only ridicolous but also unfortunate.
Posted Jun 13, 2007 13:36 UTC (Wed)
by man_ls (guest, #15091)
[Link] (1 responses)
Posted Jun 13, 2007 21:56 UTC (Wed)
by notamisfit (guest, #40886)
[Link]
Posted Jun 14, 2007 1:59 UTC (Thu)
by error27 (subscriber, #8346)
[Link]
It is not so unreasonable: Linus said:
Linus on GPLv3 and ZFS
How can you _ever_ sign anything sight unseen? That's just
stupid, and that's totally regardless of any worries about the FSF.
Said that way, it looks like the correct thing to do. However, given that (as you say) "v2 or later" licensing gives the choice to the user, I'm not particularly worried about misuse.
It creates the possibility that code created in a downstream work may not be usable upstream. Linus has put his cards on the table in the past; he wants code back. Linus on GPLv3 and ZFS
Instead of "ridiculous and unfortunate" I would say "justified by current events."Linus on GPLv3 and ZFS