Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

FSF Wastes Away Another "High Priority" Project

phoronix.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

21–30 of 104 posts

Re: FSF Wastes Away Another "High Priority" Project

#21

Post by muuh-gnu »

TylerE wrote: post #13
liljimmytables wrote: post #8

> LibreCAD is GPLv2 licensed since it came out of code from the QCad Community Edition product from Ribbonsoft. It's bound to GPLv2. The GPL has an upgrade clause. > This program is free software; you can redistribute it and/or modify it under the terms of the GNU General Public License as published by the Free Software Foundation; either version 2 of the License, or (at your option) any later version. Why doesn't th…

Because that's not what's used. GPLv2 has an _optional_ update clause that Ribbonsoft/QCad did not elect to use. This file may be distributed and/or modified under the terms of the GNU General Public License version 2 as published by the Free Software Foundation and appearing in the file gpl-2.0.txt included in the packaging of this file.

> GPLv2 has an _optional_ update clause that Ribbonsoft/QCad did not elect to use.

Actually, the clause is recommended by the FSF. Projects that remove the clause do that fully intentionally.

Considering how long copyright lasts (70 after the death of the author), it is IMHO pretty short sighted to make the licence of a project stuck in time and unable to react to any future legal challenges.

Re: FSF Wastes Away Another "High Priority" Project

#23

Post by anonymouz »

Anyone surprised by the fact that the FSF puts its principles about the purity of free software licenses before pragmatism hasn't been paying much attention. The GPLv3 is the flagship license of the FSF and they think it fixes some issues with the GPLv2, so it's hardly surprising that they will refuse to relicense their high priority projects under the older license. "But you'll gain more users" has never been a reason for the FSF to compromise on their principles.

One may equally well ask why LibreCAD insists on GPLv2 (without upgrade clause), and does not switch to GPLv3 if they want to use GPLv3 libraries.

Re: FSF Wastes Away Another "High Priority" Project

#24

Post by bitwize »

dllthomas wrote: post #5
rosser wrote: post #2

This surprises anyone? As far as the FSF (or at least Stallman, which for all practical purposes is the same thing) is concerned, LibreCAD and FreeCAD are in the wrong here — for using one of the FSF's own licenses . Stallman is a zealot, and this is what zealots do.

> [T]his is what zealots do. This, and rebelling against the Roman occupation of the Holy Land.

Or giving their life for Aiur.

Re: FSF Wastes Away Another "High Priority" Project

#25

Post by h2s »

abraininavat wrote: post #12

Could someone tell me, is the FSF actually relevant anymore? If so, how?

There is always the need for somebody to stand up as the opposing side to those who seek to build their business on abusive practices such as vendor lock-in or DRM. The FSF is that voice, and it's a more important role than ever.

For example, the FSF has long warned of the dangers of DRM, and in recent years these warnings have proved themselves prescient now that we have things like Amazon remotely wiping Kindles on a whim and deleting objectionable books. More recently, the FSF has begun making a lot of noise about the dangers of SecureBoot. Will the wider developer community disregard these warnings as the ravings of irrelevant zealots? Based on past observations, I certainly hope not.

Re: FSF Wastes Away Another "High Priority" Project

#26

Post by muuh-gnu »

jamesjporter wrote: post #19
benatkin wrote: post #9

When did the FSF change it from GPLv2 to GPLv3? It should be possible to go back to that version and fork it. Or is it applied retroactively?

I believe license changes can be applied retroactively to all versions with the permission of all the copyright holders; I would assume this is what was done.

Only if you still get it directly from the copyright holder.

If you get it from someone else, and that someone got their copy under the terms of GPLv2, they still can distribute it under v2.

Re: FSF Wastes Away Another "High Priority" Project

#28

Post by TylerE »

muuh-gnu wrote: post #21
TylerE wrote: post #13

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Because that's not what's used. GPLv2 has an _optional_ update clause that Ribbonsoft/QCad did not elect to use. This file may be distributed and/or modified under the terms of the GNU General Public License version 2 as published by the Free Software Foundation and appearing in the file gpl-2.0.txt included in the packaging of this file.

> GPLv2 has an _optional_ update clause that Ribbonsoft/QCad did not elect to use. Actually, the clause is recommended by the FSF. Projects that remove the clause do that fully intentionally. Considering how long copyright lasts (70 after the death of the author), it is IMHO pretty short sighted to make the licence of a project stuck in time and unable to react to any future legal challenges.

Not so sure. Given the FSF's patent activism, I would not release software with an upgrade cause in the license, because I don't trust the FSF to not really mug things up with GPLv4, in ways that expose me to liability.

Re: FSF Wastes Away Another "High Priority" Project

#29

Post by sigzero »

e1ven wrote: post #14
liljimmytables wrote: post #8

> LibreCAD is GPLv2 licensed since it came out of code from the QCad Community Edition product from Ribbonsoft. It's bound to GPLv2. The GPL has an upgrade clause. > This program is free software; you can redistribute it and/or modify it under the terms of the GNU General Public License as published by the Free Software Foundation; either version 2 of the License, or (at your option) any later version. Why doesn't th…

It's not necessary to include that clause. Many software packages don't. When they talk about making a package GPLv2+, instead of GPLv2, I believe that's the distinction they're talking about.

No, if the clause isn't in there then it doesn't apply. You can talk about anything you want.

Re: FSF Wastes Away Another "High Priority" Project

#30

Post by doctorpangloss »

Why not provide a way for users to download the library separately and execute it as a binary blob? That way, if there's a license violation, it is the responsibility of the user. Kind of like libdvdcss and Handbrake?

On the other hand, it seems odd to me that the kind of person who would be hung up by licenses is interested in using free software. Why not just buy AutoCad at this point?

I guess that's sort of the FSF's biggest mistake. They act like there are no alternatives. Though they seem to understand that with LGPL:

This is why we used the Lesser GPL for the GNU C library. After all, there are plenty of other C libraries; using the GPL for ours would have driven proprietary software developers to use another—no problem for them, only for us.

Post reply on HN