3 ms·
Well you don't 'have to think about it' even if you licence your code as GPL (or any other licence). It's not as if someone forces you to chase after violators.
by gillianseed 13y ago
Well you don't 'have to think about it' even if you licence your code as GPL (or any other licence). It's not as if someone forces you to chase after violators.
- jes5199 13y agoI guess you're right. That article a few days ago has me fretting about GPL 2 vs GPL 3 and the incompatibility between them. I mean, I'd like my code to be used in whatever projects need it, and I'd like to be able to accept code back from them. But it seems like it would be really easy to accept code that accidentally constrains you to a particular license.
- belorn 13y agoIf you want compatibility between the two GPL licenses, the easiest way to do so is to license the software under GPLv2 or any later version. Alternatively, one can add an exception for GPLv2 while licensing the code under GPLv3.
- gillianseed 13y agoWell if the main criteria is that want your code to be used in whatever projects need it, then permissive licencing is most likely your best option. If you do want to use GPL then just like belorn said, the 'or later' clause keeps GPL compability against later versions and I believe a majority of GPL projects use that. Linux is of course a notable exception.