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

11–20 of 104 posts

Re: FSF Wastes Away Another "High Priority" Project

#11

Post by JoshTriplett »

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…

The line you quoted doesn't appear in the terms of the license; projects can use that language to apply GPLv2 or any later version, but they don't have to do so. Many projects explicitly use version 2 only, most famously the Linux kernel.

Re: FSF Wastes Away Another "High Priority" Project

#13

Post by TylerE »

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.

Re: FSF Wastes Away Another "High Priority" Project

#14

Post by e1ven »

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.

Re: FSF Wastes Away Another "High Priority" Project

#15

Post by kryptiskt »

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…

There are projects with or without the upgrade clause, the former is sometimes referred to as GPLv2+. Linux, for example, lacks that clause.

Re: FSF Wastes Away Another "High Priority" Project

#16

Post by muuh-gnu »

JoshTriplett wrote: post #11
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…

The line you quoted doesn't appear in the terms of the license; projects can use that language to apply GPLv2 or any later version, but they don't have to do so. Many projects explicitly use version 2 only, most famously the Linux kernel.

So it is effectively their fault for preventing the licence of their project from _ever_ being updated, even in the case where some future legal loophole makes exploiting GPLv2 code possible.

It is short sighted essentially freezing the legal status of a project forever, and it is even more idiotic to blame the FSF for being incompatible with projects that voluntarily cut off forward-compatibility by removing the "or any later" clause.

Re: FSF Wastes Away Another "High Priority" Project

#17

Post by jlarocco »

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.

I'm not so sure FSF is trying to say they're in the wrong for using GPLv2. In my mind, it's similar to Apple or Microsoft not releasing a new version of iTunes or Office for one of their old operating systems. They're not saying anybody is "in the wrong," but it's the old version and people should upgrade.

I have a hard time blaming FSF for wanting other projects to upgrade to GPLv3 instead of downgrading their own project to GPLv2. It could almost be said that it's the whole point of the GPL.

And, like you said, this should be a surprise to absolutely nobody.

Re: FSF Wastes Away Another "High Priority" Project

#19

Post by jamesjporter »

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.
Post reply on HN