3 ms·
"...Apple decided that while it could comply with the terms of GPLv2 license with regards to rsync 2.x, it could not comply with the terms of GPLv3 license with
by chasil 2y ago
"...Apple decided that while it could comply with the terms of GPLv2 license with regards to rsync 2.x, it could not comply with the terms of GPLv3 license with regards to rsync 3.x."
This is due to the software patent terms that appeared in GPLv3.
https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=21645618 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=21645618
https://lobste.rs/s/8lbh1k https://lobste.rs/s/8lbh1k
https://archive.ph/AeMTz https://archive.ph/AeMTz
- IAmLiterallyAB 2y agoI think its actually the anti-Tivoization stuff that they take issue with
- chasil 2y agoThe GPL wiki lists software patents prior to the Tivo clauses, and links to this: "Early drafts of version 3 of the GNU General Public License (GPLv3) contained several patent retaliation clauses that varied in scope, some of which were later removed due to concerns about their efficacy. The final published version of GPLv3 contains a patent retaliation clause similar to those in the Apache License and Mozilla Public License, which terminates rights granted by the license in response to litigation alleging patent infringement in the software." https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Software_patents_and_free_software https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Software_patents_and_free_soft... That would be a significant factor in avoiding GPLv3.