On Dec 4, 2007 11:57 PM, Souvarine <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> I haven't studied GPLv3 in details but as far as I know the idea is
> pretty much the same that GPLv2. GPL means "Absolutely no use of the code in
> a non free project !"
>
Not true. You can _use_ GPLed code in whatever way you wish
> But, I don't know if I have the right to GPLv3 my own code based on soya
> bindings, if soya stay in GPLv2 ??? Anyone knows ?
I'm quite sure you can.
Jiba
signature.asc
Description: PGP signature
___
Soya-user mailing list
Soya-user@gna.org
https:/
As far as I'm aware, gpl3's "restrictions" are that which disallow
things like DRM that harm the end user. I have no objects to soya
going gpl3, as I do not feel it restricts me as either a developer or
a user; however gpl2 is also adequate for my needs, so it really
matters very little to me whi
Le Tuesday 04 December 2007 03:11:39 marmoute, vous avez écrit :
> On 4 déc. 07, at 00:36, Jiba wrote:
> > I'm also thinking about updating the licence from GPL v2 to GPL v3.
> > As Soya was under the "GPL v2 or any later version" licence, this
> > should not cause any problem. However any comment
I haven't studied GPLv3 in details but as far as I know the idea is
pretty much the same that GPLv2. GPL means "Absolutely no use of the
code in a non free project !". GPLv3 just removed some holes in GPLv2
that were used by some to go around that restriction.
Note that GLPv3 is just about sour
