Troy wrote: >> Either way, just to clarify, SWORD is licensed under version 2. We do >> not add the common "or later" clause. It seems odd to me that so many >> projects effectively give GNU the right to license their software under >> whatever future terms they want. 3 is still fairly controversial and >> we've been happy with 2 for many years, so for now we're still version 2 >> (if that helps any). >> My biggest concern with sticking to version 2 and not dual-licensing with GPL version 3 is that the code in the project may become less and less useful to other GPL projects that have moved to GPL version 3. What harm would come of allowing the code to be licensed under GPL version 2 or GPL version 3, at the user's option? That still doesn't give all power to GNU to do anything they want in the future, but it would help build a bridge to future GPL projects that prefer version 3. GPL version 3 is a better defense against software patent problems than version 2.
-- Just my 5 toia's worth of input. (The 2 toia coin is no longer legal tender in Papua New Guinea.) Michael (Whose only contributions to the Sword Project have been Public Domain code and text, anyway.) _______________________________________________ sword-devel mailing list: sword-devel@crosswire.org http://www.crosswire.org/mailman/listinfo/sword-devel Instructions to unsubscribe/change your settings at above page
