Re: [Gnu-arch-users] Front page to wiki now modifiable again

[Adrian Irving-Beer]

On Mon, Mar 22, 2004 at 11:15:04PM +0100, Matthieu Moy wrote:

> What do you mean by « safe » ? 

In the context of my e-mail, only that v2 is the most recent released
version of the GPL, and that using 'v2' in contrast to 'v2+' meant that
you actually saw the 'contract' your code was released under.

In other words, I meant 'guaranteed safe' in the sense that you
eliminate all uncertainty of the future.

> v2+ Guarantees that anybody  will be able to use/distribute/modify the
> work. 

Yes, and it also preemptively guarantees whatever v3+, v4+, etc.
guarantees (in addition to v2).  

Is this a bad thing?  Depends who you talk to.

> Are you  really affraid  that some  evil guys steel  the Wiki,  make a
> fork, distribute it under another licence ?

One, this will only happen if v3 allows relicensing, which is almost
infinitely unlikely (from what I know).

Two, I'm not really worried about the Wiki at all.  Nor am I advocating
one license style over the other -- I was merely summarising what
everyone else was advocating in order to understand it. :)


(Sorry for the message delay -- busy week at work.  One we would likely
not have gotten through, sanity intact, without arch.  Wahoo!)

signature.asc
Description: Digital signature