On Sat, Dec 28, 2013 at 08:53:56PM +0000, Clint Adams wrote: > On Sat, Dec 28, 2013 at 09:45:09AM +0100, David Weinehall wrote: > > As one of the "GPL v2 only" proponents, I take affront. I choose to > > license what little software I release as GPL v2 only because I do not > > consider the GPL v3 to have what attracted me to use the GPL v2 in the > > first place. > > The only theoretical advantage I see to GPLv2 is in the termination > clause, and in practice that seems to be really more trouble than > it's worth. > > Beyond that you have substandard and unclear wording, tivoization, > lesser patent protection, and incompatibility with Apache 2.0.
Apart from the termination clause, the GPLv2 is far more concise, I don't see tivoization as a problem (it's the software I want to protect, not anyone's combination of it with hardware), nor do I care about compatibility with Apache 2.0 -- I do, however, care about compatibility with GPL v2, which GPL v3 isn't. Regards: David -- /) David Weinehall <t...@debian.org> /) Rime on my window (\ // ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ // Diamond-white roses of fire // \) http://www.acc.umu.se/~tao/ (/ Beautiful hoar-frost (/ -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-devel-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: http://lists.debian.org/20131229025006.gb25...@hirohito.acc.umu.se