Slashdot Mirror


Torvalds "Pretty Pleased" With Latest GPLv3

Novus Ordo Seclorum writes "According to CNet, Linus Torvalds is 'pretty pleased' with the current GPL v3 draft. He said, 'Unlike the earlier drafts, it at least seems to not sully the good name of the GPL any more.' After his earlier criticism, some had questioned whether such controversies would lead to rifts in the community, especially if the kernel ended up under a different license than the GNU tools. But with the latest revisions, Linus will entertain moving the kernel over to the GPL v3."

7 of 295 comments (clear)

  1. Most interesting scenario is Linux + Solaris by starseeker · · Score: 4, Insightful

    While Linus Torvalds is not the sole copyright holder of the Linux kernel, it cannot be denied that an "official" project to shift the kernel from GPLv2 to GPLv3 would open up some interesting possibilities.

    One immediate question I would have is whether he would leave in the "or any later version" clause this time or remove it again. If he does that we might have to go through this whole mess again in another 15 years, but maybe that's the idea.

    Linux as GPL3 only becomes of true importance if OpenSolaris also becomes GPL3. If that is the case, there could be an immediate and dramatic improvement seen in both projects as the code starts to flow both ways. OpenSolaris could start to take advantage of the driver code in Linux (or at least, use it to make the code Solaris would need) and Linux could start working on goodies like Dtrace support. Mutually beneficial, and everyone wins.

    Of course, there is no reason beyond speculation to think Solaris will use GPL3. The situation is potentially very exciting, but it would require both Solaris and Linux to move from their current license and neither decision will be made lightly.

    Fingers crossed...

    --
    "I object to doing things that computers can do." -- Olin Shivers, lispers.org
    1. Re:Most interesting scenario is Linux + Solaris by Ed+Avis · · Score: 4, Insightful

      You don't have to trust the FSF completely, since even if they release a truly terrible new version of the GPL, the older ones can still be used. About the 'worst' thing the FSF could do would be to say that GPLv4 will be a permissive licence allowing anything.

      Unless you have strong feelings that the current version of the GPL is the only right one, it's an easier life for everyone to leave in the 'or any later version' language. I don't agree with everything the FSF does, and in particular I think that trying to retrospectively punish Novell for their patent deal with Microsoft is a bad idea, but in the wider interests of free software we should try to keep in step with the FSF and not have a proliferation of different GPL versions making code sharing awkward.

      --
      -- Ed Avis ed@membled.com
  2. Re:viral by BlueTrin · · Score: 4, Insightful

    Commercial licenses are also viral, most of licenses do NOT allow you to redistribute/resell products using their tools/librairies, unless you pay an extravagant fee.

    People who try to scare you when saying that the GPL is viral are the same ones who put patents over their code and resell you their tools for a fee.

    --
    Don't you know it is now both immoral and criminal to think beyond the next quarterly report?
  3. About time! by SanityInAnarchy · · Score: 4, Insightful

    I still don't feel that Linus "gets it" about GPLv3. I'm still not entirely sure about GPLv3 myself, and I should probably go back and read a draft.

    But, at least now it's obvious he's reading and comprehending. He may still disagree with it, and I disagree with him, but it looks like they're talking now.

    Which is more than I can say about the last round of flamewars... Last time, he honestly sounded like a Slashdotter who hadn't bothered to RTFA, just repeating the same unfounded arguments, some of which were blatantly wrong to anyone who actually read the license...

    --
    Don't thank God, thank a doctor!
  4. And... by bnavarro · · Score: 4, Insightful

    Watch how fast Sun becomes "displeased" with the latest GPL3 draft, and considers not open-sourcing Solaris under the GPL3 license.

    Seriously, this is not a troll. I am convinced that the only reason Sun was considering this is because the Linux project was not. There is no chance in hell they want to see any of their kernel code end up inside the Linux kernel.

  5. Re:Misleading summary? by kripkenstein · · Score: 4, Insightful

    How is it misleading? The summary says "But with the latest revisions, Linus will entertain moving the kernel over to the GPL v3" - which means pretty much what the quote of Linus you gave says, "The current draft makes me think it's at least a possibility in theory, but whether it's practical and worth it is a totally different thing."

    How are these significantly different?

  6. Re:Interesting.. by marcosdumay · · Score: 5, Insightful

    "The pro-FSF lobby countered these concerns with:

    1. Trust us, we're lawyers and academics
    2. Feel free to comment on the detailed wording but we're not changing our mind about the principles
    3. If you're against GPLv3 you must be for software patents and TiVOization"

    Let's not forget the FSF style concern 0:

    0. It IS broken.