From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from mailman by lists.gnu.org with archive (Exim 4.43) id 1I6C6m-0002v6-IE for mharc-grub-devel@gnu.org; Wed, 04 Jul 2007 17:09:56 -0400 Received: from mailman by lists.gnu.org with tmda-scanned (Exim 4.43) id 1I6C6j-0002u3-C7 for grub-devel@gnu.org; Wed, 04 Jul 2007 17:09:53 -0400 Received: from exim by lists.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.43) id 1I6C6h-0002tJ-PA for grub-devel@gnu.org; Wed, 04 Jul 2007 17:09:52 -0400 Received: from [199.232.76.173] (helo=monty-python.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1I6C6h-0002tD-IL for grub-devel@gnu.org; Wed, 04 Jul 2007 17:09:51 -0400 Received: from fencepost.gnu.org ([140.186.70.10]) by monty-python.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.60) (envelope-from ) id 1I6C6h-0003wW-6j for grub-devel@gnu.org; Wed, 04 Jul 2007 17:09:51 -0400 Received: from tschwinge by fencepost.gnu.org with local (Exim 4.60) (envelope-from ) id 1I6C6h-0004pZ-1g for grub-devel@gnu.org; Wed, 04 Jul 2007 17:09:51 -0400 Date: Wed, 4 Jul 2007 23:09:51 +0200 From: Thomas Schwinge To: The development of GRUB 2 Message-ID: <20070704210951.GG4835@fencepost.gnu.org> References: <200707042140.15118.okuji@enbug.org> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/signed; micalg=pgp-sha1; protocol="application/pgp-signature"; boundary="8Ll2WeG2L2s3+nMg" Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <200707042140.15118.okuji@enbug.org> X-Homepage: http://nic-nac-project.de/~schwinge/ User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.11 X-detected-kernel: Linux 2.6, seldom 2.4 (older, 4) Subject: Re: GPL version 3 X-BeenThere: grub-devel@gnu.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list Reply-To: The development of GRUB 2 List-Id: The development of GRUB 2 List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Wed, 04 Jul 2007 21:09:53 -0000 --8Ll2WeG2L2s3+nMg Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Hello! On Wed, Jul 04, 2007 at 09:40:15PM +0200, Yoshinori K. Okuji wrote: > So I bet that GRUB Legacy should remain under GPLv2. But this can cause s= ome=20 > problem potentially. Let's say, we find the same bug both in GRUB Legacy = and=20 > in GRUB 2. In the current trend, the bug would be fixed in GRUB 2 sooner.= But=20 > this fix may not be backported to GRUB Legacy as it is, once GRUB 2 migra= tes=20 > to GPLv3, because of the license incompatibility. Thus this means that th= e=20 > maintenance of GRUB Legacy would be harder. I'm having a problem here. The copyright for all contributions and patches to GNU software (which both GNU GRUB legacy and GNU GRUB2 are) is transferred to the FSF. And why should the FSF (as the legal entity ``copyright holder'') disallow to apply (license) such patches under both GPLv2 and GPLv3 conditions? Whose understanding is wrong? Is it mine? Regards, Thomas --8Ll2WeG2L2s3+nMg Content-Type: application/pgp-signature; name="signature.asc" Content-Description: Digital signature Content-Disposition: inline -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v1.4.2.2 (GNU/Linux) iD8DBQFGjAyfgfzh735dTTURAvKbAJ9yJEBnRS+rteb9cS8Hgd1OnoEHSwCgvw3O B1RUEWFix0K0fuWsFuF67so= =f0uY -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- --8Ll2WeG2L2s3+nMg--