Move GPLv2 vs v3 fun...

Rob Landley rob at landley.net
Wed Sep 13 20:11:56 UTC 2006


On Wednesday 13 September 2006 12:10 pm, Roberto A. Foglietta wrote:
> Hi,
> 
>  Everything IMHO.
> 
>  Everything it is GPL2 or later could be re-licensed under GPL2 only
> or GPL3 only.
>  I get GPL2 or later code I choose what licence I want,  I change a
> comment and I release it under the choosen licence.

I know.  But if we wanted our code to be arbitrarily licenseable under any 
terms the end user wanted, we'd put it in the public domain.  (That is, after 
all, what gives the end users the most options.)

I'm worried about what's best for the project.

>  Some authors could not be happy about it, may be it is not polite
> too, but I think it is legal.

I know it's legal.

> Who wants the GPL2 or later goes to 
> original and patch it back.

1.2.0 and earlier will continue to be out there, sure.  They're already 
released, with whatever licenses they were under.  That's out of my hands 
now, I'm talking about new releases.

Rob
-- 
Never bet against the cheap plastic solution.



More information about the busybox mailing list