No GPLv2-only projects on Savannah

Posted Mar 23, 2006 12:34 UTC (Thu) by Wol (subscriber, #4433)
In reply to: No GPLv2-only projects on Savannah by Arker
Parent article: No GPLv2-only projects on Savannah

I thought v3 was carefully worded so it WAS compatible with v2.

Cheers,
Wol

No GPLv2-only projects on Savannah

Posted Mar 23, 2006 14:54 UTC (Thu) by southey (guest, #9466) [Link] (1 responses)

Nope, the v3 is not fully compatible with v2 at least with the current optional v3 clauses that can be applied. For example, one v3 clause is that the complete code must be released that would include any non-GPL code so a GPL v3 program linked to a source library (nor necessarily closed) that is incompatible under v3 with the complete code cause. This also bites a GPL v2 or later license if the 'or later' aspect is invoked.

Bruce

No GPLv2-only projects on Savannah

Posted Mar 24, 2006 2:46 UTC (Fri) by mepr (guest, #4819) [Link]

If the "or later" clause is included, then who gets to choose which parts of the optional license apply?
If the author, then no it doesn't.
If the user, then it's mostly irrelevant (although it would be interesting if the user chose restrictions the original author didn't like, made changes, and released the new derived work under the more restricted GPL3

Mark

No GPLv2-only projects on Savannah

Posted Mar 23, 2006 17:59 UTC (Thu) by vonbrand (subscriber, #4458) [Link]

Impossible. Either it grants you the exact same as GPLv2 does, or it takes away something. If the former, why bother. If the later, it is not compatible, by definition. Besides, the draft as circulated has the option of creating variants of GPLv3 (with extra restrictions) that will end up being incompatible among them...

Besides, my code might be GPLv2, but if GPLv3 contributions seep in, the only valid license for the whole is GPLv3 (as it is more restrictive than GPLv2). Just like Linux has BSD licenced pieces, but the whole must be handled as GPLed.