On Tue, Apr 26, 2011 at 10:09 AM, Walter Bender <[email protected]> wrote: > To me, one of the more compelling arguments for considering GPLv3 is > "When the Rules Are Broken: A Smooth Path to Compliance".
Interesting! I hadn't thought it'd be so awkward, but if one is to be 100% formal, you need to do something like that. Good news is -- if SL likes that, GPLv2 doesn't encode a mechanism for a path to restoration; so nothing blocks a project from stating its "practices" for restoration. As a promise from the copyright holder, it effectively "extends" the license. You can't extend GPL adding restrictions, but you can sure add promises :-) (The project would need agreement from copyright holders - just once.) m -- [email protected] [email protected] -- Software Architect - OLPC - ask interesting questions - don't get distracted with shiny stuff - working code first - http://wiki.laptop.org/go/User:Martinlanghoff _______________________________________________ IAEP -- It's An Education Project (not a laptop project!) [email protected] http://lists.sugarlabs.org/listinfo/iaep
