Should Wine move to LGPL 3?
kai.blin at gmail.com
Fri Jul 13 10:22:43 CDT 2007
On Friday 13 July 2007 13:18:41 Damjan Jovanovic wrote:
> On 7/13/07, Tom Wickline <twickline at gmail.com> wrote:
> > Why shouldn't Wine move?
> LGPL3 = GPL3 + additional permissions:
> "This version of the GNU Lesser General Public License incorporates
> the terms and conditions of version 3 of the GNU General Public
> License, supplemented by the additional permissions listed below."
That's correct. This means that, as the GPLv3, the LGPLv3 is more compatible
with international laws, as opposed to being US-centric like the (L)GPLv2
was. Also, all the other reasons to move to the GPLv3 apply.
> The GPL3 has no track record so far, and it's too political and
> controversial for my liking.
At Samba, we have decided to switch to GPLv3 for the coming releases,
releasing the libraries that were under the LGPLv2 under the LGPLv3.
As for other projects, see http://gpl3.palamida.com:8080/index.jsp
> Let's wait a while before making the decision.
What specifically are we waiting for? Until the GPLv3 is tested in court?
Until someone TiVolizes Wine? Christmas?
WorldForge developer http://www.worldforge.org/
Wine developer http://wiki.winehq.org/KaiBlin
Samba team member http://www.samba.org/samba/team/
Will code for cotton.
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: not available
Size: 189 bytes
Desc: This is a digitally signed message part.
Url : http://www.winehq.org/pipermail/wine-devel/attachments/20070713/e5ff7fa2/attachment.pgp
More information about the wine-devel