Joined: Apr 25, 2006 Posts: 2315 Location: Montpellier, France
Posted: Wed Jul 11, 2007 11:34 am Post subject:
I think it's already been discussed elsewhere.
IIRC, GPL v2 is still prefectly adequate for NeoOffice right now, so there is no compelling reason to adopt GPL v3. Moreover, the password-protection functionality in OOo/Neo might conflict with the new GPL's "anti-DRM" stuff.
I haven't looked at GPL v3 but my very limited understanding was that it was created to close the loopholes on modified GPL v2 code that weren't making the source code available because they are running on servers and, since the modified code has not been distributed, they don't have to share the source.
In theory, someone could make a server version of NeoOffice, modify the code, and never share the source, but given the practicality of doing that with are GUI-intensive code, the usefulness of our code to do something like that is pretty low so I'm not terribly worried about that GPL v2 hole being exploited.
Joined: May 25, 2003 Posts: 4752 Location: Santa Barbara, CA
Posted: Wed Jul 11, 2007 8:25 pm Post subject:
I believe that there are other provisions in GPL v3 tackling ability to modify code on DRM enabled devices as well. I've read through it after it was released but honestly I haven't digested it yet.
I'm in no rush to change licenses myself. The deciding factor will be if we want to incorporate some functionality that is only available under GPL v3 or LGPL v3. If that becomes the case I've got no problem switching personally, but we'd still need to evaluate if there are any repercussions for our existing policies.
You cannot post new topics in this forum You cannot reply to topics in this forum You cannot edit your posts in this forum You cannot delete your posts in this forum You cannot vote in polls in this forum You cannot attach files in this forum You cannot download files in this forum
