On 9/24/07, Gonzalo Tornaria <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > These are the people that both contributed code to the core library and > > took the time to actually explicitly put their names as copyright holders > > on files (in most cases this means they were the first to create the given > > file). They contributed code under the assumption that their code is > > GPL v2 only, so permission should be obtained before changing the > > license on their code to GPL v2 or later. > > I contributed under that assumption. I don't like GPL v2 or later, I > might be closer to GPL v2 or v3 than that. Overall, I agree with > Joel's comments earlier in this thread.
Wait, are you saying that you would not allow your code to be re-licensed "GPL v2 or later" for Sage? Or, are you just saying you don't like it, but you would do it. There's no way I'm going to do "GPL v2 or v3 only". It doesn't solve anything, since they same problem will come up again in a few years, and it will vastly more difficult to move forward since people will be so hard to contact. That could effectively kill Sage. The options are either "GPL v2 or later" (and remove any code from Sage that can't be relicensed) or "fork GMP and GSL". I don't like either option at all, and I right now I really hate the FSF for forcing this crap on me. But that's the situation we're in. -- William --~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~ To post to this group, send email to sage-devel@googlegroups.com To unsubscribe from this group, send email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/sage-devel URLs: http://sage.scipy.org/sage/ and http://modular.math.washington.edu/sage/ -~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---
