From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Grant Likely Date: Wed, 24 Jun 2009 11:16:28 -0600 Subject: [U-Boot] U-book and GPLv3? (fwd) In-Reply-To: References: <20090618145128.69F27832E416@gemini.denx.de> <4A3ADFE3.7000005@gmail.com> Message-ID: List-Id: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit To: u-boot@lists.denx.de On Tue, Jun 23, 2009 at 10:33 AM, Detlev Zundel wrote: >> Is there any chance of convincing those authors to change that? > > Apart from the the above reasons, currently most people who voiced their > opinion (not too many right now) oppose the move. ?The reasoning seems > to be that companies using U-Boot inside a commercial product consider > it to be "a neccessary precondition to only accept blessed firmware > upgrades" (my wording). ?What motivates this argument is not completely > clear to me. ?Maybe it is fear of being liable as a product vendor to > faulty sw upgrades. That isn't my reasoning. I license under GPLv2 because I like that license. I don't like GPLv3 because I think it is too complex and it tries to solve things that are non-problems for me. GPLv2 expresses well how I want to license my code. GPLv3 does not. g. -- Grant Likely, B.Sc., P.Eng. Secret Lab Technologies Ltd.