Linux kernel: GPLv2 or GPLv3 poll

Message

DeanLinkous · #1 Post by **DeanLinkous** » 2006-11-15 23:43

Hi guys,

I have come up with something a bit silly. But what is life without some silliness, right? I hope it is okay to post this here.

Since we have heard from all the big guns I thought a poll for Joe User to have their voice heard about the kernel v2/v3 dilema would be cool. So here it is. Assuming that GPL v3 is possible of course!

http://poll.pollcode.com/vR

DeanLinkous · #2 Post by **DeanLinkous** » 2006-11-16 01:17

Some links...

A older comparison of GPLv2 and GPLv3
http://www.groklaw.net/articlebasic.php ... 8155841115

draft 1 of GPLv3 compared to draft 2 of GPL v3
http://www.fsfeurope.org/projects/gplv3 ... t2.en.html

inconnu · #3 Post by **inconnu** » 2006-11-16 05:03

GPLv3

The rise of Digital Restrictions Management warrants it, imo, and the arguments against GPLv3 don't make sense to me.

ajdlinux · #4 Post by **ajdlinux** » 2006-11-16 06:13

Whilst I'm not sure whether I like GPLv3 more than v2, I would support at least moving to a v2+ provision for code sharing, especially as Sun is considering v3 for OpenSolaris and many other projects will switch to v3.

DeanLinkous · #5 Post by **DeanLinkous** » 2006-11-16 17:22

I think v3 is great and with draft 2 it should be flexible enough IMO to overcome any objections that were originally voiced.

Of course, I am a nobody so I have no real say in it I guess... But I am a user and I would like to think have a shred of importance in that regard if nothing else.

inconnu · #6 Post by **inconnu** » 2006-11-18 07:21

Another reason for the GPLv3:

Eben Moglen has now stated that GPLv3 will be redrafted to include clear language that will make the Novell-Microsoft agreement an obvious GPL violation ...

From Groklaw's "Getting Cute with the GPL". A good read.