Slashdot Mirror

← Back to Stories (view on slashdot.org)

Drafting GPL3

Posted by ryuzaki0 on from the version-upgrades-are-hard dept.

johns writes "In an article released yesterday, Eben Moglen and Richard Stallman outline four purposes of the GPL, to explain the guideposts they will use in drafting GPL3: the GPL is a worldwide copyright license, the code of conduct for free software distributors, the constitution of the free software movement, and the literary work of RMS. They also make this commitment: 'The Foundation will, before it emits a first discussion draft, publicize the process by which it intends to gather opinions and suggestions.'"

3 of 389 comments (clear)

  1. New for version 3 by Lord+Bitman · · Score: 5, Funny

    I think there should be customizable skins, those make everything better.

    --
    -- 'The' Lord and Master Bitman On High, Master Of All
  2. Re:the code of conduct for free software distribut by Speare · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Just because the GNU folks call it "free" doesn't mean it is free in all ways. A GNU license ensures the *user* has the most freedom, and a BSD license ensures the *developers* have the most freedom. In either case, the other group loses some freedom. A GNU license creates a situation where developers cannot merge published code with their proprietary code, while a BSD license creates a situation where some users might not have access to a particular modified variant of the published code.

    --
    [ .sig file not found ]
  3. My Suggestion by Milo+Fungus · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Make sure that GPL3 is human-readable, as version 2 was. I absolutely hate reading legalese. It really bothers me that so many important things in my life (such as student loans, credit cards, computer software) assume that I am capable of understanding, and hold me accountable to understand the contents of legal documents. I appreciate the simplicity of the GNU GPL, and consider it an essential feature of the license. The BSD license is even simpler.

    <tangent>One thing that bothers me is when GPL software requires that you agree to the license during the install procedure. The GPL is not an end-user license; it is a distribution license. You must accept and comply with the terms of the license if you wish to redistribute GPL'ed works. End users are not required to agree to anything in order to simply use it, or even to modify it for their own use.</tangent>