2008/3/6, Francesco Poli <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>: > In my opinion, the decision boils down to: > > o if you want to enhance compatibility *and* you trust the FSF to > keep the promise that future versions of the GNU GPL will be "similar > in spirit to the present version"[2][3], then you may choose a "v2 or > later" approach > > o if you want to enhance compatibility *and* you don't mind seeing > your copyleft more or less weakened (or even completely destroyed) by > successive versions of the GNU GPL, then you may choose a "v2 or later" > approach[4] > > o if don't mind reducing compatibility *and* you want a strong and > certain copyleft (while not trusting the FSF to keep the spirit of the > GNU GPL v2 in successive versions), then you should choose a "v2 only" > approach
There's another possibility: dual-licensing your code under the GPLv2 only and the GPLv3 only. Miry -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
