Do we want the code to be GPLv3-able, or should we remove the "or any
later option"?
The code base has sufficiently low contributor counts that we can
probably make a change one way or the other.
Sincerely,
Lars Marowsky-Brée
--
High Availability & Clustering
SUSE Labs, Research and Develo
On Thu, Oct 05, 2006 at 07:11:52PM +0200, Lars Marowsky-Bree wrote:
> Do we want the code to be GPLv3-able, or should we remove the "or any
> later option"?
IANAL and all that, and also I'm not a contributor (yet!) but
> The code base has sufficiently low contributor counts that we can
> probab
On 10/5/06, Lars Marowsky-Bree <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
Do we want the code to be GPLv3-able, or should we remove the "or any
later option"?
I'm happy with 2, and 3 seems to wander into paranoid territory.
So my vote would would be to stay at 2.
However, I dont think we need to remove the "o
Lars Marowsky-Bree wrote:
> Do we want the code to be GPLv3-able, or should we remove the "or any
> later option"?
>
> The code base has sufficiently low contributor counts that we can
> probably make a change one way or the other.
You wouldn't have to change all of it I don't think.
But, the co
