points by flossly 1 day ago | 0 comments
Linux (Linus T himself iirc) is very GPLv2.
They are not onboard with the innovation that was GPLv3. That innovation was mostly about software patents iirc. But the result was also that big corps liked GPLv3 even less than GPLv2.
On top of that it was going to be very hard (near impossible) to get all devs to agree to a v2->v3 license bump.
[–] voakbasda 15 hours ago
Some contributors were already dead by the time the decision would have come to a head. Getting them to sign an agreement would have been challenging.
[–] NoidFonsense 17 hours ago
As a gplv3 advocate, I disagree. Anti-Tivoisation is thr main innovation of gplv3
[–] ender341341 1 day ago
> On top of that it was going to be very hard (near impossible) to get all devs to agree to a v2->v3 license bump.
My understanding was this was never a problem, almost all of the kernel was licensed as "GPL2 or newer" until GPL3 was released and they removed the "or newer" from new releases
[–] tredre3 1 day ago
You're mistaken. Here's a direct quote from Linux Torvalds dated 2006:
The "version 2 of the License, or (at your option) any later version"
language in the GPL copying file is not - and has never been - part of the
actual License itself. It's part of the _explanatory_ text that talks
about how to apply the license to your program, and it says that _if_ you
want to accept any later versions of the GPL, you can state so in your
source code.
The Linux kernel has never stated that in general. Some authors have
chosen to use the suggested FSF boilerplate (including the "any later
version" language), but the kernel in general never has.
In other words: the _default_ license strategy is always just the
particular version of the GPL that accompanies a project. If you want to
license a program under _any_ later version of the GPL, you have to state
so explicitly. Linux never did.
[–] ender341341 6 hours ago
Thanks for clarifying, I'd been misunderstanding that for 20+ years.
I think what Linus is against in the GPLv3 is mostly the anti-tivoisation mechanisms. He wants tivoisation as a feature for the Linux kernel.