GPL2 creates the loophole. The AGPL closes the loophole. The GPL3 was supposed to incorporate language from AGPL and close the loophole but did not. It is not clear to me whether GPL3 closes the loophole or not. If it does not (like GPL2 does not).
I have no objection to move to GPL3. Yet that does not help in clarifying the web2py license. As a hypothetical question. Who here would oppose to moving to BSD or MIT or other more permissive license? Massimo On Dec 16, 2:54 pm, "Branko Vukelic" <branko.vuke...@gmx.com> wrote: > > ----- Original Message ----- > > From: mdipierro > > Sent: 12/16/10 07:56 PM > > To: web2py-users > > Subject: [web2py] Re: it case you missed it... > > If we were to move from GPL2 to GPL3 people would not be allowed to > > modify web2py running on their servers without making available the > > source code of their changes. I do not see any reason for requiring > > this. > > What's AGPL for then? Wasn't _AGPL_ supposed to prevent that? Anyway, I think > GPLv3 makes i possible to use code licensed under licenses like MIT and BSD > in a GPLv3 project, which is otherwise a bit incompatible. Or did I miss > something? > > -- > Branko Vukelic > > branko.vuke...@gmx.com > > http://www.brankovukelic.com/http://flickr.com/photos/foxbunny
