On 7/13/07, Ian Macfarlane <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
I've been meaning to ask about this since (L)GPL3 was released.
I'd also like to weigh in on my reasons for liking the (L)GPLv3. The termination clause is clarified and a grace period added for compliance. As it stands right now, if someone was to inadvertently not adhere to the terms of a (L)GPLv2 program an over zealous major contributor could revoke distribution rights downstream to the offender even if the offender was in the process of trying to remedy the situation. It may only be a technicality but this bothers me. When corporate powers, with their own motives of profit outweigh commitment to FreeSoftware, are major contributors all the loopholes have to be closed. Imagine a world where SCO had contributed a lot of (L)GPL code and then they had gotten lucky to find a technicality in the license to revoke it for everyone. -- Steven Edwards "There is one thing stronger than all the armies in the world, and that is an idea whose time has come." - Victor Hugo
