2 ms·
I should lay out the options for you, so you can understand them. LibreCAD is GPLv2 only, it has code from Ribbonsoft and also from independent contributors. In
by synchronise 13y ago
I should lay out the options for you, so you can understand them.
LibreCAD is GPLv2 only, it has code from Ribbonsoft and also from independent contributors.
In order for them to transition to GPLv3, the following must occur:
- Ribbonsoft has to clear the code release with their legal department again to see if any contracts prevented parts of the code being released with such a license, then to approach the contractors who contributed to the program and get their input, then they have to go through and see if any patent licenses they have for their code would prevent such a transition. This equates to a lot of money that Ribbonsoft may not want to dish out again.
- Any contributors to LibreCAD who used GPLv2 only licenses or didn't assign copyright to the team would have to be contacted and their permission would have to be obtained for a change.
- Any other GPLv2 only code would have to be stripped out in order to obtain compatibility with GPLv3
On the other hand, the FSF holds all the copyrights to the LibreDWG codebase. It would cost them nothing to change the license to GPLv2, nor would it waste any time with reimplementation of code already out there.
The answer is so simple that I'm finding it difficult to believe that you still can't see it.
- pessimizer 13y ago>The answer is so simple that I'm finding it difficult to believe that you still can't see it. That the FSF should compromise its entire purpose so Ribbonsoft can save money and avoid duplicating code? I don't think anybody donates to the FSF in order that Ribbonsoft can maintain their business model.
- synchronise 13y agoIt's not its entire purpose, the GPLv2 is still a valid GNU license, it's still copyleft and this sort of behaviour from them isn't helping the community at all, nor is it helping free software. It's pragmatic and idiotic.