Re: Instead of GPL License - Why not LKL? (Linux Kernel License)

2007-06-15 Thread Marc Perkel
--- Kevin Bowling <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > If I'm not mistaken, the OP is suggesting that the > name simply be > changed from GPL to LKL to avoid confusion of GPL2 > vs GPL3. Same > verbiage, different name. If these FSF loonies keep > cutting into our > corner of pragmatism, I am inclin

Re: Instead of GPL License - Why not LKL? (Linux Kernel License)

2007-06-15 Thread Marc Perkel
--- Glauber de Oliveira Costa <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > On 6/15/07, Marc Perkel <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > I've been somewhat following the GPL2 vs. GPL3 > debate > > and the problem is that it leads to confusion. > GPL3 is > > nothing like GPL2 and the GPLx leads people to > believe > > t

Re: Instead of GPL License - Why not LKL? (Linux Kernel License)

2007-06-15 Thread Jarek Poplawski
On 15-06-2007 08:52, debian developer wrote: ... > Even if it's just a name change, it will be a different license and > requires the > agreement of all authors. It's much easier( not that we want to) to go > to GPLv3 than > go to LKL. Doing bad things is usually much easier than good things. Aft

Re: Instead of GPL License - Why not LKL? (Linux Kernel License)

2007-06-14 Thread debian developer
On 6/15/07, Kevin Bowling <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: On 6/14/07, Glauber de Oliveira Costa <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > On 6/15/07, Marc Perkel <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > I've been somewhat following the GPL2 vs. GPL3 debate > > and the problem is that it leads to confusion. GPL3 is > > nothi

Re: Instead of GPL License - Why not LKL? (Linux Kernel License)

2007-06-14 Thread Kevin Bowling
On 6/14/07, Glauber de Oliveira Costa <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: On 6/15/07, Marc Perkel <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > I've been somewhat following the GPL2 vs. GPL3 debate > and the problem is that it leads to confusion. GPL3 is > nothing like GPL2 and the GPLx leads people to believe > that GPL3

Re: Instead of GPL License - Why not LKL? (Linux Kernel License)

2007-06-14 Thread Glauber de Oliveira Costa
On 6/15/07, Marc Perkel <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: I've been somewhat following the GPL2 vs. GPL3 debate and the problem is that it leads to confusion. GPL3 is nothing like GPL2 and the GPLx leads people to believe that GPL3 is just GPL3 improved. So - just throwing out the idea that if Linus is

Instead of GPL License - Why not LKL? (Linux Kernel License)

2007-06-14 Thread Marc Perkel
I've been somewhat following the GPL2 vs. GPL3 debate and the problem is that it leads to confusion. GPL3 is nothing like GPL2 and the GPLx leads people to believe that GPL3 is just GPL3 improved. So - just throwing out the idea that if Linus is unhappy with GPL3 that Linux lose the GPLx license a