[IAEP] [Sugar-devel] ANNOUNCE: Moving Sugar to GPLv3+

[Paul Fox]

chris wrote:
 > Hi,
 > 
 > On Fri, Apr 22 2011, Chris Ball wrote:
 > > I think you've repeatedly ignored Scott's claim that you can't modify
 > > COPYING or the source files because that would be *changing* the
 > > license, rather than taking advantage of GPLv3 redistribution rights.
 > > Can you ask Brett or someone at the FSF what the right thing to do is?
 > 
 > I chatted with some FSF staffers on IRC, they agree with Bernie's
 > interpretation that modifying COPYING and the source headers *is*
 > the way that you "choose to redistribute under the GPLv3+ instead",
 > and that it's a modification of the license that was explicitly
 > allowed ahead of time by the "or later" clause.
 > 
 > They haven't yet been able to find any documentation that explains
 > this or backs it up, though.


i think i've missed the point of all this.  bernie's original mail
points to the FSF rationale for GPL3 as the reason for moving sugar to
GPL3, but somehow i think there must be more to it.  i.e., what
exactly are the arguments in favor of _sugar_ changing licenses?

i have no stake in this decision at all -- i'm just wondering about
the "why".

paul
=---------------------
 paul fox, pgf at laptop.org