BTW, I have changed my mind after yet another reading of the GPL v3. There
is almost no way I will support a move to this license. I have found that
problems I have had with earier drafts over additional restrictions to code
being added by other people are still present in the released license.
I do NOT want to release the software under a license which might allow
other people to further restrict our code beyond what we decide as a
project. Therefore my position is "it is going to be very hard to convince
me to move." I still won't say "never" but my support for moving would
essentially require an existential threat to the project that other means
could not allieviate.
I also am going to make a suggestion that we find out what the Canadian
definition of "derivative works" is. It is becoming increasingly clear to
me that dynamic linking to libraries is not restricted and this may be why
the GPL v3 has moved away from a mere reliance on "derivative works"
standards to a requirement of distribution of additional source packages
under terms which can be relicensed to *exactly* those restrictions and
permissions in the GPL (not a superset thereof). We may not be affected by
our dependencies after all and may be far better off staying with the GPL 2
only.
Best Wishes,
Chris Travers
-------------------------------------------------------------------------
This SF.net email is sponsored by: Splunk Inc.
Still grepping through log files to find problems? Stop.
Now Search log events and configuration files using AJAX and a browser.
Download your FREE copy of Splunk now >> http://get.splunk.com/
_______________________________________________
Ledger-smb-devel mailing list
[email protected]
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/ledger-smb-devel
