[ros-dev] GPLv3 Migration - flamewar warning

[Alex Ionescu]

Dude, you're my hero.

I also refuse to license any of my code to GPL 3.

--
Best regards,
Alex Ionescu

-----Original Message-----
From: ros-dev-bounces at reactos.org [mailto:ros-dev-bounces at reactos.org] On
Behalf Of Magnus Olsen
Sent: July 3, 2007 11:40 AM
To: ReactOS Development List
Subject: Re: [ros-dev] GPLv3 Migration - flamewar warning

Start with  read the fucking GPL v3  Section/paragraph  2 
NO DUAL LISCEN ARE ALLOWN WITH GPL V3
--------------------------------------------------------

GPL V3 Can go some where in the trachcan (I DO not DARE use 
stronger word)

A COMMANDY CAN RELEASE OBJECT FILE AS 
SOURCE CODE INSTEAD FOR HUMAN READING 
TEXT FILE IN GPL V3 

and alot other shit. 

I will refuse go over to GPL V3




----- Original Message ----- 
From: "Steven Edwards" <winehacker at gmail.com>
To: <ros-dev at reactos.org>
Sent: Tuesday, July 03, 2007 8:14 PM
Subject: [ros-dev] GPLv3 Migration - flamewar warning


> Hi,
> I've been inactive for a while and most likely will be so for a while
> however I thought this would be a good time to bring up the GPLv3 due
> to its recent release. Does anyone have any objections to license as
> it stands now? If you've not had a chance to review it I suggest you
> do so. I am happy to help answer any questions regarding the license
> as I did take part in early drafting on behalf of the ReactOS and Wine
> Projects although I am not a lawyer and anything I say should be at
> least reviewed by the SFLC or your own lawyers.
> 
> It is my suggestion that if there are no objections then we start to
> contact each developer requesting them to dual license existing code
> as GPLv2/GPLv3 and use the same tracking system as the audit system to
> do the migration.
> 
> ReactOS has never been really clear on the "or later version" clause
> in the GPL. The ReactOS license includes the text and the license
> number is not specified in most of the ReactOS sources, though I don't
> think it would be fair to simply take all of the source and re-license
> it without some discussions and a vote.
> 
> It would also be possible to distribute ReactOS under both licenses
> via dual licensing as a possible compromise if a dispute arises. This
> would mean if some third party (Third Party A) wants to take ReactOS
> enhance it and then resell it, they would not have to worry about
> another third party (Third Party B) taking their modifications and
> redistributing them for profit without the patent protections of the
> GPLv3 and the Anti-Tivoization clauses. The only downside to this is
> if Third Party A is only making changes under GPLv3 then those changes
> could not go back in to ReactOS trunk. I don't think this is a major
> issue, as I expect both third parties to be proprietary vendors making
> enhancements that the Project might not want/need in the trunk in any
> case. Third Party A in the interest of keeping forking to a minimal
> would still send bug fixes back up both licenses.
> 
> 
> Thanks
> 
> -- 
> Steven Edwards
> 
> "There is one thing stronger than all the armies in the world, and
> that is an idea whose time has come." - Victor Hugo
> _______________________________________________
> Ros-dev mailing list
> Ros-dev at reactos.org
> http://www.reactos.org/mailman/listinfo/ros-dev
_______________________________________________
Ros-dev mailing list
Ros-dev at reactos.org
http://www.reactos.org/mailman/listinfo/ros-dev