On 11/22/10 11:04, Michael Schumacher wrote: >> Von: Christopher Curtis<[email protected]> > >> *** (Sven, Mitch) *** >> >> This LICENSE text should probably be updated as 'Section 2' of GPLv3 >> doesn't talk about aggregations - it's been moved into section 5. It >> might also be useful to address this issue directly as the GPLv2 is >> generally well understood to allow command line usage as an >> 'aggregation', but GPLv3 seems to muddy this distinction. > > At the moment I'm not even sure if GIMP should be licensed under GPLv3 > without a much better understanding of the license. > For example, the fact that it is now impossible to use GPLv2-only libraries > in plug-in wasn't considered at all. It's not such much the fact that we > can't use them anymore, rather the problem of no one even thinking about it > when we changed the license version to v3. > > I have contacted the Freedom Task Force of the FSF in order to get help, and > they requested more details. Unfortunately my spare time (or the lack > thereof) didn't allow me to write a reply yet. > > > I'd be glad to learn about any additional side-effects of a GPLv3-licensed > GIMP (note that libgimp* is licensed under LGPLv3) that may surprise us - but > please base them on actual FSF information and not mere speculation. > > > Regards, > Michael
I did suggest caution when the licence upgrade issue was raised originally. It seems a bit late to start considering whether it has any "side-effects" now. Maybe someone should have read it. /gg _______________________________________________ Gimp-developer mailing list [email protected] https://lists.XCF.Berkeley.EDU/mailman/listinfo/gimp-developer
