On Jul 24, 2007, at 1:20 PM, Mike McCarty wrote:
David Brodbeck wrote:
Linux *is* under the GPL. But it's under GPL v2. The FSF is
pushing hard for Linus to relicense it under GPL v3. The two
licenses are not considered compatible.
Hmm. That's interesting. Care to elaborate? I thought that Linus
retained rights.
Do a Google search on "linux gpl v3" and you'll come across a lot of
discussion. The basic gist is that Linus can't relicense the kernel
as a whole because not all of the code is his; every individual
author/maintainer would have to agree to relicense. Also, he doesn't
like some of the anti-DRM provisions in GPL v3 -- he feels they
attack the problem from the wrong angle, and that they'd make things
like secure update servers untenable by requiring the distribution of
private signing keys along with the source code:
http://trends.newsforge.com/article.pl?sid=06/02/02/1636216
http://lkml.org/lkml/2006/1/25/273
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
