Re: GPLv3 code in monotone

On Fri, May 20, 2011 at 04:53:59PM -0700, Zack Weinberg wrote:
> On 2011-05-20 4:46 PM, Stephen Leake wrote:
>> GPLv3 was heavily reviewed before it was released, and has been out for
>> almost 4 years.
>>
>> Can you elaborate?
>>
>> I'm sure there are good reasons not to bother going to GPLv3, but I
>> don't understand what you mean by "premature".
>
> Switching to GPL3 would make us license-incompatible with a large body  
> of code (everything under a copyleft that isn't v3-compatible, in  
> particular, code under v2-only).  It would also make us  
> license-compatible with a large body of code (anything that adds  
> restrictions that are okay with v3 but not v2).

GLP2+ is compatible with GPL2.
GLP2+ is compatible with GPL3.

-- hendrik