Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1161054AbWBAN7e (ORCPT ); Wed, 1 Feb 2006 08:59:34 -0500 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S1161055AbWBAN7e (ORCPT ); Wed, 1 Feb 2006 08:59:34 -0500 Received: from thunk.org ([69.25.196.29]:22215 "EHLO thunker.thunk.org") by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1161054AbWBAN7c (ORCPT ); Wed, 1 Feb 2006 08:59:32 -0500 Date: Wed, 1 Feb 2006 08:59:14 -0500 From: "Theodore Ts'o" To: Rogier Wolff Cc: Alan Cox , Linus Torvalds , "Jeff V. Merkey" , Chase Venters , "linux-os (Dick Johnson)" , Kyle Moffett , Marc Perkel , Patrick McLean , Stephen Hemminger , linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Subject: Re: GPL V3 -- PLEA FOR SANITY Message-ID: <20060201135913.GA7082@thunk.org> Mail-Followup-To: Theodore Ts'o , Rogier Wolff , Alan Cox , Linus Torvalds , "Jeff V. Merkey" , Chase Venters , "linux-os (Dick Johnson)" , Kyle Moffett , Marc Perkel , Patrick McLean , Stephen Hemminger , linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org References: <1138387136.26811.8.camel@localhost> <1138620390.31089.43.camel@localhost.localdomain> <43DF9D42.7050802@wolfmountaingroup.com> <1138751851.10316.32.camel@localhost.localdomain> <20060201100127.GA13543@bitwizard.nl> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20060201100127.GA13543@bitwizard.nl> User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.11 X-SA-Exim-Connect-IP: X-SA-Exim-Mail-From: tytso@thunk.org X-SA-Exim-Scanned: No (on thunker.thunk.org); SAEximRunCond expanded to false Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Content-Length: 1172 Lines: 25 Let's give this thread a rest, OK? Whether or not Linux is licensed under the GPLv2 only or not is ultimately a matter for the lawyers. The one big problem I see with the GPLv3 effort is given the additional restrictions regarding DRM, it doesn't seem to clear to me whether a project which has even a single line of GPLv2-only code can accept GPLv3 code. That is, GPLv3 is designed to be compatible with more licenses, but that doesn't matter of GPLv2 isn't compatible with GPLv3. If that is the case, if only a _single_ person (like Rogier) has I want GPLv2-only, the whole project is can't use any GPLv3 code unless they are willing to track down and rewrite all of the code written by that person or persons. If that is true (and again, at the end of the day lawyers or more importantly, a judge is going to have to make that call, not debating technologists) it's hard to see the GPLv3 making any headway. - Ted - 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/