From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Mike Frysinger Date: Thu, 18 Jun 2009 11:42:52 -0400 Subject: [U-Boot] U-book and GPLv3? (fwd) In-Reply-To: <20090618145128.69F27832E416@gemini.denx.de> References: <20090618145128.69F27832E416@gemini.denx.de> Message-ID: <200906181142.53352.vapier@gentoo.org> List-Id: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit To: u-boot@lists.denx.de On Thursday 18 June 2009 10:51:28 Wolfgang Denk wrote: > From: Richard Stallman >> Have you considered moving U-boot to "GPLv3-or-later"? > > I know that we have had similar discussions before (see for example > http://thread.gmane.org/gmane.comp.boot-loaders.u-boot/24029), but I > would like to take the chance and re-poll what the community's > opinion about this is. > > Comments welcome... i think it's a bad idea. it'll almost certainly lead to forks as people use it on systems where they dont want to let people boot custom builds. i.e. customers absolutely want to lock their hardware such that only their builds run on it. GPLv2 allows this while GPLv3 does not. Linux has taken a realistic stance here and i think U-Boot should follow suit (well, i dont care about the "or later" part, just that the base from denx is GPLv2). also, it would make code sharing with Linux a nightmare since many pieces have moved to explicitly GPLv2 -- no one is going to audit code flowing between to make sure things can move safely. -mike -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: not available Type: application/pgp-signature Size: 836 bytes Desc: This is a digitally signed message part. Url : http://lists.denx.de/pipermail/u-boot/attachments/20090618/bce64f3a/attachment.pgp