Re: License change for the GPH.
Werner Koch <[email protected]> Tue, 22 Oct 2013 09:49:08 +0200
| Newsgroups | gmane.comp.encryption.gpg.documentation |
|---|---|
| Message-ID | <[email protected]> |
On Tue, 22 Oct 2013 03:25, [email protected] said: > Please don't ask them to do that. As a public rejection of our > lciense, that would hurt the GNU Project as a whole. And it would not Fortunately this is already in the works. I can tell what really hurts the GNU project: The stubbornness of keeping tight control over everything with the result that people try to get out of the way of everything which is related to the FSF - GPLv3 inclusive. Recall the GCC plugin discussion with the final outcome that most research is now done with LLVM and we actually helped Apple to get their semi-proprietary stuff mainstream. I have had hard times explaining why the GPLv3 is good for everyone - despite that there are really sound arguments in favor of the GPLv3. I can't tell a single argument why the FDL is better than CC-by-sa or GPL. Still you are requesting the use of the FDL for all FSF related documentation. Luckily we never implemented that for the GnuPG included docs. > There are many solutions to a problem like this. I looking for a For example working with CC to make the FDL compatible to CC-by-sa but then one could also simple switch to CC-by-sa. Salam-Shalom, Werner -- Die Gedanken sind frei. Ausnahmen regelt ein Bundesgesetz.