Messages in this thread | | | Date | Sun, 17 Jun 2007 10:29:57 -0700 (PDT) | From | david@lang ... | Subject | Re: Dual-Licensing Linux Kernel with GPL V2 and GPL V3 |
| |
On Sun, 17 Jun 2007, Gabor Czigola wrote:
> Hello! > > I didn't follow the whole thread from the beginning, but I see that > there are pros and cons for both versions of GPL. > > I wonder why the linux kernel development community couldn't propose > an own GPL draft (say v2.2) that is "as free as v2" and that includes > some ideas (from v3) that are considered as good (free, innovative, in > the spirit of whatever etc.) by the majority of the kernel developers. > > I guess to have an own version of the GPL license could also help to > resolve (future) dual-licensing problems.
well, for one thing creating a kernel-only license would immediatly make the kernel incompatible with all the GPLv2 code that's around.
that wouldn't be a win for anyone except people who want to lill linux.
David Lang - To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
| |