Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1755558AbXFOPaW (ORCPT ); Fri, 15 Jun 2007 11:30:22 -0400 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S1752403AbXFOPaL (ORCPT ); Fri, 15 Jun 2007 11:30:11 -0400 Received: from smtp2.linux-foundation.org ([207.189.120.14]:59386 "EHLO smtp2.linux-foundation.org" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1750861AbXFOPaJ (ORCPT ); Fri, 15 Jun 2007 11:30:09 -0400 Date: Fri, 15 Jun 2007 08:29:14 -0700 (PDT) From: Linus Torvalds To: Bernd Paysan cc: Theodore Tso , Alexandre Oliva , Sean , Adrian Bunk , Valdis.Kletnieks@vt.edu, Daniel Hazelton , Alan Cox , Greg KH , debian developer , david@lang.hm, Tarkan Erimer , linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, Andrew Morton , mingo@elte.hu Subject: Re: Dual-Licensing Linux Kernel with GPL V2 and GPL V3 In-Reply-To: <200706151202.13708.bernd.paysan@gmx.de> Message-ID: References: <20070615052432.GC14911@thunk.org> <200706151202.13708.bernd.paysan@gmx.de> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=us-ascii Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Content-Length: 2183 Lines: 54 On Fri, 15 Jun 2007, Bernd Paysan wrote: > > Ah no, it's their fault. The GPLv2 always was clear that there will be some > future releases of the GPL, and that you should keep "upgrading" possible. No. It is clear that you have the *option* of keep upgrading, but it is also equally clear that Linux has always decided *not* to exercise that option, exactly because I liked the GPLv2, not some "future upgrade". I decided that long before I saw the GPLv3. And I'm surprised by people who wonder why I did that. I'm _intelligent_, dammit. That means that I can foresee the future to some degree, at least in the limited sense of what is a likely outcome of my actions. Why are people surprised by the fact that I have foresight? I may be known for being an impolite bastard, but quite frankly, anybody who thinks I'm a _stupid_ impolite bastard must be missing a page. You can disagree with my opinions. You can call me obstinate, impolite, and opinionated. But quite frankly, very few people have ever found me *stupid*. So give me that - I'm not stupid. That means that I actually *can* predict the future to some fuzzy degree, and that people really should *not* be surprised by the fact that I never let the FSF control my choice of license. > The GPLv2 tries hard to be compatible with any further versions of the GPL > as possible, by allowing people to choose which license you take, and by > making sure that no man in the middle can restrict this choice. If people > deliberately select to use "GPLv2 only", who's to blame? There's no "blame". There's only credit. Besides, you are wrong. The *default* for the GPLv2 in the presense of license information is *not* "v2 or later" In order to get "GPLv2 or later", you actually have to explicitly specify it. I just find it sad that so many people did that, often apparently just because they didn't actually read or understand the license. Linus - 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/