There is a reason I did not choose GPL3 and that it is that GPL3 tries to close the "SAAS loophole" explained here: http://ross.typepad.com/blog/2007/07/open-source-lic.html
I want the loophole to apply to web2py. Let me explain. GPL2 predates SAAS therefore running a web service based on GPL2 software is not considered distribution and not subject to the GPL2 limitations. I am fine with this. I do not want to put any limitation on people running web2py as a service, not even modified/forked/closed source versions of web2py. I just want to put limitations on people trying to make forks of web2py and distribute them (in the most conventional term) closed source. If we were to move from GPL2 to GPL3 people would not be allowed to modify web2py running on their servers without making available the source code of their changes. I do not see any reason for requiring this. Massimo On Dec 16, 12:30 pm, "Branko Vukelic" <[email protected]> wrote: > > ----- Original Message ----- > > From: =?ANSI_X3.4-1968?Q?Jos=3F_L=2E?= > > Sent: 12/16/10 07:23 PM > > To: [email protected] > > Subject: [web2py] Re: it case you missed it... > > Also, is there any reason to stay in gpl v2 instead of moving to v3? > > I think someone already pointed out that GPLv3 could be an improvement over > GPLv2. It closed many of the loopholes, and also became more compatible with > other licenses such as MIT and BSD 3-clause. That's, I think, important since > some libs do have code from those two licenses. > > -- > Branko Vukelic > > [email protected] > > http://www.brankovukelic.com/http://flickr.com/photos/foxbunny
