> Hi, I am thinking of putting future releases of GNU Arch under
> the GNU GPL v3 or later versions of the GPL as published by the
> Free Software Foundation.
Er, why make Arch code license-incompatible with a lot of GPLv2
code that's out there, such as the Linux kernel and (for now)
XEmacs?
The question is infact the reverse, why was Linux made incompatible
with future versions of the GPL? It has been a known fact that the
GPLv3 will be released, it has been a concious decision on the Linux
developers to not be compatible with it (not collecting copyright
assignment, expliclty releasing the source code under GPLv2 only).
As for XEmacs, it is licensed under the GPLv2 or later, so they can
use the changes if they so choose.
In either case, Arch is already incompatible with the licenseing terms
of Linux. Linux is licensed under the GPLv2 only, while Arch is
licensed under GPLv2 or later.
What's so wrong with GPLv2?
Tiviosiation, Novel/Microsoft type deals, not being international
enough come to mind.
_______________________________________________
Gnu-arch-users mailing list
Gnu-arch-users@gnu.org
http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/gnu-arch-users
GNU arch home page:
http://savannah.gnu.org/projects/gnu-arch/
