Hi,
David Chisnall wrote:
Not specifically related to GNUstep, but I have personally come across several
companies who refuse to allow GPLv3 code in the door and a smaller number that
won't allow GPLv2 code in. Most of these are large companies that do employ
lawyers. Have you ever tried to get a definitive answer from a lawyer? I can
guarantee that no lawyer will look at the GPL and say definitively that it's
safe, because lawyers simply do not do that with legal documents that complex
(the FreeBSD Foundation's lawyer has difficulty making definitive statements
about the 2-clause BSD license, and that's an order of magnitude simpler).
I have seen a lot of talk about GPLv3 being evil but GPLv2 acceptable.
However, I have nevcer seen clear statements, motivated and compared of
what can be done and not-done that motivate this, not by companies, not
even a terse statement by FreeBSD.
Not being a lawyer, I read both licenses and had a problem forming my
own opinion. In laymans speak, I like v2 better because cleaner,
smaller, although the original issue addressed by v3 ("tivoization") is
a real one.
If you have some unbiased (how much unbiased it can be in this kind of
discussion) I'd like to read about it. Up to now I kept my personal
projects v2+
Riccardo
_______________________________________________
Discuss-gnustep mailing list
[email protected]
https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/discuss-gnustep
