Kaveh R. GHAZI wrote:
I too think that it would be a bad idea to switch the 4.1 branch to
GPLv3,
Can you please elabortate why?
I think it's a bad idea to change the license on a release branch in
deep maintenance mode. That would be a surprise to users. The idea of
such branches has always been that you could get the latest bits and
just pick up some bug fixes. GPLv3 is not a bug fix in the usual sense.
I argued against changing the license for 4.2.x for the same reasons,
but was overruled by RMS. But, there, for all practical purposes, we
had to make a new release. It would be in keeping with our past
practice to let 4.1.x slowly wither away at this point.
That said, I'm not going to argue this too forcefully. If someone wants
to do all the work to update everything to GPLv3 and do a release, so be
it. I would just ask that the GPLv3-ness of the release be made
aggressively obvious.
--
Mark Mitchell
CodeSourcery
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
(650) 331-3385 x713
