* Jari Häkkinen -- Wednesday 06 April 2011: > The GPL ideology is to keep the "or later" clause.
I'm not much into ideologies. I consider both GPLv2 and GPLv3 acceptable. But I don't intend to ever (again) license anything with an "or later" clause. This is signing a contract without reading it first! Why should I allow anyone to re-license a fork of my work under GPLv4 or GPLv5?! I don't know what's in those licenses. Nobody does. And I don't consider the "or later" clause to be in the spirit of the GPL at all. (In the spirit of the FSF, yes.) Because an "or later" clause allows a fork under a license that is not compatible with what the original work is under, so that improvements in the fork cannot be ported back -- something that the FSF (rightfully) sells us as one of the advantages. You can include GPLv2 code in GPLv3 code, but not the other way around, right? So, basically, I'd be forced to switch the original work to GPLv3 to use other people's additions to it. Very much *not* in the spirit of Free Software. I'm just not naïve/stupid enough for that. m. ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ Xperia(TM) PLAY It's a major breakthrough. An authentic gaming smartphone on the nation's most reliable network. And it wants your games. http://p.sf.net/sfu/verizon-sfdev _______________________________________________ Flightgear-devel mailing list Flightgear-devel@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/flightgear-devel
