Re: how about mutual compatibility between Linux's GPLv2 and GPLv3?

[Theodore Tso <tytso@mit.edu>]

On Fri, Jun 22, 2007 at 02:34:17AM +0100, Al Viro wrote:
> What really gets me is that you know it.  And you know that just about
> everyone here knows it.  Yet you keep playing with rather pathetic
> attempts of innuendo and misdirection, when it's bloody obvious that
> you won't even get a PR win out of the entire mess you've been sustaining
> for about a week already (seriously, count postings in these threads).

I'm not sure Alexandre realizes it, but by his carrying on and on and
on with his really poorly reasoned arguments (I may disagree with
Eben's positions, but he's a much more reasonable debator and advocate
for the FSF's positions), Mr. Oliva, Latin America Board Member and
Free Software Evangelist, has probably made it made it much more
*unlikely* that the Linux kernel will ever go GPLv3.

About a week and half ago, Linus was saying he was a pragmatist and if
there was a good enough reason (such as if Solaris adopting GPLv3 and
there being aufficiently interesting technology that it would be worth
the code exchange), there was a chance that he might be for it.  But
Alexandre has been so annoying and so obtuse, that people's positions
have hardened to the point where I doubt kernel developers would be
willing to go for at this point.  Something that went from being
merely extremely unlikely has become "practically impossible".

> The first law of holes: when you are in one, stop digging...

Indeed.

Another law of negotiations --- don't goad people into hardening their
positions; it helps neither you nor your interests.

					- Ted