4 ms·
I thought GPL 3 was not compatible with GPL 2.
by aflag 6y ago
I thought GPL 3 was not compatible with GPL 2.
- xoa 6y agoYou're correct, the GPL v3 is not compatible with the GPL v2 simply as a matter of license [0]. GP might be confusing "compatibility" with specific grant of future version usage. The FSF default recommended notice boilerplate for the GPL v2 is: This program is free software; you can redistribute it and/or modify it under the terms of the GNU General Public License as published by the Free Software Foundation; either version 2 of the License, or (at your option) any later version. So it includes an explicit "or any later version" clause. Since by far most projects just copy/paste standard language it's common to be able to combine v2 and v3. However, not all projects do that, with the most famous and impactful of course being the Linux kernel itself which is explicitly GPL-2.0 only. ---- 0: https://www.gnu.org/licenses/license-list.en.html https://www.gnu.org/licenses/license-list.en.html
- Xylakant 6y agoI meant "compatible" in the sense of "allows upgrade to", so you're correct. I could have phrased that better.