>> It has not yet been decided what to do about files that are part of >> run-time libraries and are covered by GPL/LGPL + exception. >> Therefore, no changes to
>I find this truncated sentence to be slightly ominous as I believe >there is only one plausible choice for those files: we must convert >them to be GPLv3/LGPLv3 + exception, where the exception is identical >or equivalent to the current one. Adding any restrictions to the >licensing of those files will cost us a significant portion of our >user base. I see this as a less ominous development than you. I think the issue is that the FSF may be trying to come up with a unified GPLv3 + exception that libjava, libstdc++, libgfortran, libgcc, etc. can all use. The current exception wording is being reviewed with the existing GPLv3 text by lawyers. Certainly, this would be an improvement over the current practice. -benjamin
