| |||||||||||||
|
| |||||||||||||
Can't use with GPLv2 under LGPLv3?Can't use with GPLv2 under LGPLv3?Posted Jul 10, 2007 8:57 UTC (Tue) by Los__D (subscriber, #15263)In reply to: Can't use with GPLv2 under LGPLv3? by Jel Parent article: Samba Adopts GPLv3 for Future Releases
The same meaning is intended ("Don't take away people's rights to this software"), but since there has been found more ways to do so, more restrictions has been added, so they can't be compatible, unless you kept the "or later" part to GPLv2.
(Log in to post comments)
Can't use with GPLv2 under LGPLv3? Posted Jul 10, 2007 15:57 UTC (Tue) by JoeBuck (subscriber, #2330) [Link] RMS and the FSF have long recommended that people license their software "GPLv2 or later". Those who did this have no problem. But people who said "GPLv2 only" explicitly rejected GPLv3. This means that they cannot link their code to GPLv3 or LGPLv3 code, unless they drop their rejection first by changing the license.
|
|
||||||||||||