6 ms·

They are here https://www.gnu.org/licenses/old-licenses/old-licenses.html https://www.gnu.org/licenses/old-licenses/old-licenses.html

anonymousiam 3y ago
It's indicative of the rift between FSF and Linux developers that the GPL v2 is on the "Old Licenses" page and "kept here for reference." I'll understate this; Linux is a fairly important project that still uses the GPL v2 license.
- Ferret7446 3y ago
  It's infeasible for Linux to switch to GPLv3, even if Linus and every Linux dev alive today wanted to, so it's a moot point.
- RobotToaster 3y ago
  Only because Linus supports tivoization.
  - Longhanks 3y ago
    And because Linus just does not give a fuck. He is an engineer, not a politician, and the GPLv2 to this day is serving its purpose, and Linux‘ success proves him right.
    - happymellon 3y ago
      Unless you have a parallel universe generator, I'm not sure how you could prove that sticking to the GPLv2 has been more successful than moving to V3.
      - slowmovintarget 3y ago
        Its success proves that GPL v3 was not needed to spur such success. That's not a judgement on whether v3 is "better" by some measure or other. It's a realistic measure that the modifications in v3 weren't needed for Linux to continue existing and flourishing. A != B does not imply that !B = A
        happymellon 3y ago
        Then I misunderstood what the GPP was trying to say, as it read to me that they were saying that Linus was right in sticking to the GPLv2. My thought is that simply that he wasn't wrong, which is what you are then repeating back to me.
        anonymousiam 3y ago
        Unless Linus and the team want to re-write a bunch of GPLv2 kernel code (and modules), they are stuck with GPLv2 whether they want to change it or not. Linux is now over 30 and some of the original authors are no longer here to authorize a change in their copyright license. https://lwn.net/Articles/169158/ https://lwn.net/Articles/169158/
    - epylar 3y ago
      Might makes right, after all.
  - shagie 3y ago
    Linus on why he doesn't like the GPLv3 - https://youtu.be/PaKIZ7gJlRU https://youtu.be/PaKIZ7gJlRU The start of the video: Q: do you agree that you undermine GPL version 3 and how can I get you to stop Linus: what Q: how can we get you to stop Linus: oh I hate GPL version 3 undermined it on purpose I actually thought the GPL version 3 extensions were horrible. I understand why people would want to do them but I think it should have been a completely new license. My argument for liking version 2 - and I still think version 2 is a great license - was that I give you source code you give me your changes back we're even. Right - that's that's my take on GPL version 2 it's that simple and version 3 extended that in ways that I personally am really uncomfortable with; namely I give you source code that means that if you use that source code you can't use it on your device unless you follow my rules and to me that's that's a violation of everything version 2 stood for ... Tiviozation is specifically called out 2:33. Driver compatibility and one way license changes preventing reincorporation of code at 3:30
    - gowld 3y ago
      Linus cared about software, not hardware devices. Linus chose not to try to define "general purpose computer", Stallman's threshold for what kind of hardware should run Free(Libre) software. Stallman, usually quite orthodox, had to carve out "general purpose computers" from "legitmiate appliances". He decided that Tivo is a "general purpose computer" but a microwave is not. Linus drew the line at the software/hardware boundary. Affero GPL is much more interesting, as it closes the "someone else's machine" loophole for the "distribution" trigger. This is more extreme than Tivoization.
- Proven 3y ago
  [dead]
kzrdude 3y ago
The URL in the posting here used to redirect to GPL3, not to any of the "old licenses". The indication of that is given by internet archive which recorded that redirect: https://web.archive.org/web/20230215001250/https://www.gnu.org/licenses/gpl.html https://web.archive.org/web/20230215001250/https://www.gnu.o...

anonymousiam 3y ago

It's indicative of the rift between FSF and Linux developers that the GPL v2 is on the "Old Licenses" page and "kept here for reference." I'll understate this; Linux is a fairly important project that still uses the GPL v2 license.

Ferret7446 3y ago
It's infeasible for Linux to switch to GPLv3, even if Linus and every Linux dev alive today wanted to, so it's a moot point.
RobotToaster 3y ago
Only because Linus supports tivoization.
- Longhanks 3y ago
  And because Linus just does not give a fuck. He is an engineer, not a politician, and the GPLv2 to this day is serving its purpose, and Linux‘ success proves him right.
  - happymellon 3y ago
    Unless you have a parallel universe generator, I'm not sure how you could prove that sticking to the GPLv2 has been more successful than moving to V3.
    - slowmovintarget 3y ago
      Its success proves that GPL v3 was not needed to spur such success. That's not a judgement on whether v3 is "better" by some measure or other. It's a realistic measure that the modifications in v3 weren't needed for Linux to continue existing and flourishing. A != B does not imply that !B = A
      - happymellon 3y ago
        Then I misunderstood what the GPP was trying to say, as it read to me that they were saying that Linus was right in sticking to the GPLv2. My thought is that simply that he wasn't wrong, which is what you are then repeating back to me.
        anonymousiam 3y ago
        Unless Linus and the team want to re-write a bunch of GPLv2 kernel code (and modules), they are stuck with GPLv2 whether they want to change it or not. Linux is now over 30 and some of the original authors are no longer here to authorize a change in their copyright license. https://lwn.net/Articles/169158/ https://lwn.net/Articles/169158/
  - epylar 3y ago
    Might makes right, after all.
- shagie 3y ago
  Linus on why he doesn't like the GPLv3 - https://youtu.be/PaKIZ7gJlRU https://youtu.be/PaKIZ7gJlRU The start of the video: Q: do you agree that you undermine GPL version 3 and how can I get you to stop Linus: what Q: how can we get you to stop Linus: oh I hate GPL version 3 undermined it on purpose I actually thought the GPL version 3 extensions were horrible. I understand why people would want to do them but I think it should have been a completely new license. My argument for liking version 2 - and I still think version 2 is a great license - was that I give you source code you give me your changes back we're even. Right - that's that's my take on GPL version 2 it's that simple and version 3 extended that in ways that I personally am really uncomfortable with; namely I give you source code that means that if you use that source code you can't use it on your device unless you follow my rules and to me that's that's a violation of everything version 2 stood for ... Tiviozation is specifically called out 2:33. Driver compatibility and one way license changes preventing reincorporation of code at 3:30
  - gowld 3y ago
    Linus cared about software, not hardware devices. Linus chose not to try to define "general purpose computer", Stallman's threshold for what kind of hardware should run Free(Libre) software. Stallman, usually quite orthodox, had to carve out "general purpose computers" from "legitmiate appliances". He decided that Tivo is a "general purpose computer" but a microwave is not. Linus drew the line at the software/hardware boundary. Affero GPL is much more interesting, as it closes the "someone else's machine" loophole for the "distribution" trigger. This is more extreme than Tivoization.
Proven 3y ago
[dead]

kzrdude 3y ago

The URL in the posting here used to redirect to GPL3, not to any of the "old licenses". The indication of that is given by internet archive which recorded that redirect: https://web.archive.org/web/20230215001250/https://www.gnu.org/licenses/gpl.html https://web.archive.org/web/20230215001250/https://www.gnu.o...