[PATCH] new applet: nmeter

Yann E. MORIN yann.morin.1998 at anciens.enib.fr
Wed Aug 23 21:35:36 UTC 2006


On Wednesday 23 August 2006 224, Rob Landley wrote:
> On Tuesday 22 August 2006 9:49 pm, Rich Felker wrote:
[--SNIPPed lots and lots of arguments--]

Well, I'd state it a little bit more easy to understand:

As of today, there exist a license, namely GPLv2, which terms I _know_ about.
Thus releasing some code (or whatever) under this license is done with "all the
cards in the hand", that is, I fully know what I'm doing.

Now comes this suggestion (from FSF, I guess) to include the "or later"
statement to leave the _user_ of the code the option to use another license
I know nothing about, for this license does not exist!

If the GPLv3 goes to say: "Do whatever with the code", then that user could
well use it as he wants, which might well go in direct contradiction with my
initial intent when I released it.

In my opinion, "GPLv2 or later" is not good, because I don't what this "later"
will be like. Enforce more restriction on my code? Enforce more "Openness" on
my code? I don't know. Neither do you. Again, as Rob stated, GPLv3 does _not_
exist. Only drafts are available.

Now, pleaase understand that I don't condemne GPLv3. I simply don't know what
it says, and thus can't entrust anything in it.

So, IMVHO, we should stick with "GPLv2 only" licensed code.

Regards,
Yann E. MORIN.

-- 
.-----------------.--------------------.------------------.--------------------.
|  Yann E. MORIN  | Real-Time Embedded | /"\ ASCII RIBBON | Erics' conspiracy: |
| +0/33 662376056 | Software  Designer | \ / CAMPAIGN     |   ^                |
| --==< °_° >==-- °---.----------------:  X  AGAINST      |  /e\  There is no  |
| web: ymorin.free.fr | SETI at home 3808 | / \ HTML MAIL    |  """  conspiracy.  |
°---------------------°----------------°------------------°--------------------°



More information about the busybox mailing list