about licenses, GPLv2 vs GPLv2 or later

Rob Landley rob at landley.net
Mon Apr 17 22:55:15 UTC 2006


On Sunday 16 April 2006 8:28 pm, Glenn L. McGrath wrote:
> In retrospect my mistrust of the FSF about licensing of non-software
> works doesnt effect my trust in them on software licensing.
>
> I permit any contributions i have made to busybox as GPL v2 only to be
> relicensed as GPLv2 or later.
...
> coreutils/uudecode.c
> archival/bunzip2.c

Thanks, I've updated the relevant notices in those files.

I'm concerned about gplv3, but I'd like to give the FSF the benefit of the 
doubt since gplv2 worked out ok.  It's easy to remove dual licensing (which 
this is a strange variant of) and collapse down to one good license later, 
but an amazing pain to track down copyright holders to get new permission 
notices to add another license later.

> Glenn

Rob
-- 
Never bet against the cheap plastic solution.



More information about the busybox mailing list