Slashdot Mirror

← Back to Stories (view on slashdot.org)

Samba Adopts GPLv3 For Future Releases

Posted by kdawson on from the first-trickle-in-the-flood dept.

Jeremy Allison - Sam writes with news that the Samba Team has decided to adopt the GPLv3 and LGPLv3 licenses for all future releases of Samba. Follow the link for a FAQ addressed to Samba developers and contributors. "To allow people to distinguish which Samba version is released with the new GPLv3 license, we are updating our next version release number. The next planned version release was to be 3.0.26, this will now be renumbered so the GPLv3 version release will be 3.2.0. To be clear, all versions of Samba numbered 3.2 and later will be under the GPLv3, all versions of Samba numbered 3.0.x and before remain under the GPLv2."

3 of 219 comments (clear)

  1. smbfs? by man_of_mr_e · · Score: 5, Interesting

    So doesn't this mean that smbfs is now dead? Or stuck at 3.0.x? Since the Linux kernel will not be going GPLv3, from my understanding of what Linus has said.

    --
    If you need web hosting, you could do worse than here
    1. Re:smbfs? by Jeremy+Allison+-+Sam · · Score: 5, Informative

      smbfs has been dead for a while. The replacement is CIFSFS. Luckily (or unluckily, depending on your point of view :-) this isn't a Samba project, it's developed by Steve French of IBM, and I think it's under GPLv2 or later.
      Jeremy.

  2. Re:In other news... by QuantumG · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Absolutely. I've tried to explain this before, but it always gets muddled up. Ideally I'd like to release my code with the least restrictions possible, because I want the users of my software to be free, but in practice if I don't put some copyleft like restrictions on my code then it will end up that some of the users of my software will not be free. If my goal is to maximize the freedom of the users of my software then, paradoxically, I must restrict them - specifically, from taking freedom away from others.

    As such, I believe the BSD style licenses are more idealistic than copyleft licenses, but less effective.

    --
    How we know is more important than what we know.