From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 27713 invoked by alias); 9 Jul 2007 16:41:12 -0000 Received: (qmail 27698 invoked by uid 22791); 9 Jul 2007 16:41:11 -0000 X-Spam-Check-By: sourceware.org Received: from mx1.redhat.com (HELO mx1.redhat.com) (66.187.233.31) by sourceware.org (qpsmtpd/0.31) with ESMTP; Mon, 09 Jul 2007 16:41:09 +0000 Received: from int-mx1.corp.redhat.com (int-mx1.corp.redhat.com [172.16.52.254]) by mx1.redhat.com (8.13.1/8.13.1) with ESMTP id l69GdlHv024813; Mon, 9 Jul 2007 12:39:47 -0400 Received: from pobox.corp.redhat.com (pobox.corp.redhat.com [10.11.255.20]) by int-mx1.corp.redhat.com (8.13.1/8.13.1) with ESMTP id l69GdkNK029489; Mon, 9 Jul 2007 12:39:46 -0400 Received: from free.oliva.athome.lsd.ic.unicamp.br (vpn-14-238.rdu.redhat.com [10.11.14.238]) by pobox.corp.redhat.com (8.13.1/8.13.1) with ESMTP id l69GdiqH009554; Mon, 9 Jul 2007 12:39:44 -0400 Received: from free.oliva.athome.lsd.ic.unicamp.br (localhost.localdomain [127.0.0.1]) by free.oliva.athome.lsd.ic.unicamp.br (8.14.1/8.14.1) with ESMTP id l69GdgGY013809; Mon, 9 Jul 2007 13:39:42 -0300 Received: (from aoliva@localhost) by free.oliva.athome.lsd.ic.unicamp.br (8.14.1/8.14.1/Submit) id l69GdbsD013806; Mon, 9 Jul 2007 13:39:37 -0300 To: Gerald Pfeifer Cc: Mark Mitchell , Mike Stump , "Joseph S. Myers" , Nick Clifton , gcc-patches@gcc.gnu.org, gdb-patches@sourceware.org, binutils@sourceware.org Subject: Re: Changing top level files and include/ files over to GPLv3 References: <9DB7619D-8F9F-4741-B968-D2000BD6F151@apple.com> <468EAFDA.1050800@codesourcery.com> From: Alexandre Oliva Errors-To: aoliva@oliva.athome.lsd.ic.unicamp.br Date: Mon, 09 Jul 2007 16:41:00 -0000 In-Reply-To: (Gerald Pfeifer's message of "Mon\, 9 Jul 2007 17\:11\:09 +0200 \(CEST\)") Message-ID: User-Agent: Gnus/5.11 (Gnus v5.11) Emacs/22.1 (gnu/linux) MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Mailing-List: contact gdb-patches-help@sourceware.org; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk List-Id: List-Subscribe: List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: , Sender: gdb-patches-owner@sourceware.org X-SW-Source: 2007-07/txt/msg00151.txt.bz2 On Jul 9, 2007, Gerald Pfeifer wrote: > On Mon, 9 Jul 2007, Alexandre Oliva wrote: >> At which point I wonder why someone would have problems upgrading the >> license of an earlier GCC code base. Can anyone list any reasons why >> this upgrade would be objectionable, considering that it was widely >> (?) known that GCC (and any other FSF-owned code) would upgrade to >> GPLv3 pretty much as soon as it was available? > I am not sure the customers of $X will appreciate a license change of > this kind with a point release, The code was already GPLv2+. And then, any customer can still do whatever they could, beyond any doubt, under GPLv2, and then some more: GPLv3 relaxes a number of GPLv2 requirements, and clarifies a number of GPLv2 requirements to make sure none of newly-invented restrictions are interpreted as not covered by the "no further restrictions" wording. And then, people can still run the program without accepting the license. So, honestly, what's the big deal? Is it just "fear of the unknown", or is there more to it? -- Alexandre Oliva http://www.lsd.ic.unicamp.br/~oliva/ FSF Latin America Board Member http://www.fsfla.org/ Red Hat Compiler Engineer aoliva@{redhat.com, gcc.gnu.org} Free Software Evangelist oliva@{lsd.ic.unicamp.br, gnu.org}