Re: gplv3 files and updates

[Simon Josefsson]

address@hidden (Karl Berry) writes:

> Are you saying that gnulib be released under GPLv2+ indefinitely?  If
> so, the other gnulib maintainers should have a say (I don't include
> myself, since I hardly contribute anything much these days), and, most
> importantly, rms should be asked.

I think it would be useful to keep some modules GPLv2, at least for some
time.

I have no problems with changing to (L)GPLv3-only for possibly the
majority of modules, unless there are GNU projects under (L)GPLv2 using
a particular module, or if there is some other good reason to stay with
v2.

> The expectation is that all GNU projects will upgrade to GPLv3.  rms
> already said that in some cases it may be a tactical decision not to
> upgrade, or to delay upgrading.  But that's a decision that is,
> ultimately, up to him.  (I doubt "because Snort won't like it" is going
> to be an overwhelming reason to him.)

RMS suggested that GnuTLS shouldn't be upgraded now.  It would create
unnecessary work if I have to fork the current gnulib modules and
maintain them separately, which would be needed if gnulib switched to
(L)GPLv3.

/Simon