On Mon, Jul 09, 2007 at 09:07:20PM +0200, Dominique Michel wrote: > Le Mon, 9 Jul 2007 09:39:14 -0700, > Greg KH <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> a ??crit : > > > On Sun, Jul 08, 2007 at 04:46:57PM +0200, Dominique Michel wrote: > > > > > > I personally think at gpl-3 is better as gpl-2 because GPLv3 will block > > > tivoization. > > > > Only if the kernel is changed to v3, which it will not be. > > > > So this crusade by the FSF to stop what they explicitly said was a legal > > use of v2, never succeeded, so please stop trying to worry about it. > > > > thanks, > > > > greg k-h > > I don't want to force anyone to use v3, I was just saying at v3 is better as > v2 > from my point of vue. Maybe I am wrong, but just to say at I am wrong is not > enough.
I never stated that you are wrong about why you feel v3 is better for you, I only stated that if you are worried about the "tivoization" issue, then you have a long time to be worried, as it only affects the kernel. Also, since the Linux kernel is not going to change licenses, this whole thing really isn't an issue at all. > Can you explain more. If the kernel can be tivoized by someone I'm sorry, but "tivoized" is not a verb. Please explain what you mean by this. > , who will use this kernel? How can this affect the software xyz that > have a v3 licence? I do not understand the question, can you reprase it? thanks, greg k-h -- [EMAIL PROTECTED] mailing list
