Re: GIT license (Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: [ANNOUNCE] git-pasky-0.1)

Ingo Molnar
2005-04-11T07:45:51Z

* Linus Torvalds <torvalds@osdl.org> wrote:

> Btw, does anybody have strong opinions on the license? I didn't put in
> a COPYING file exactly because I was torn between GPLv2 and OSL2.1.
>
> I'm inclined to go with GPLv2 just because it's the most common one,
> but I was wondering if anybody really had strong opinions. For
> example, I'd really make it "v2 by default" like the kernel, since I'm
> sure v3 will be fine, but regardless of how sure I am, I'm _not_ a
> gambling man.

is there any fundamental problem with going with v2 right now, and then
once v3 is out and assuming it looks ok, all newly copyrightable bits
(new files, rewrites, substantial contributions, etc.) get a v3
copyright? (and the collection itself would be v3 too) That method
wouldnt make it fully v3 automatically once v3 is out, but with time
there would be enough v3 bits in it to make it essentially v3. This way
we wouldnt have to blanket trust v3 before having seen it, and wouldnt
be stuck at v2 either.

Ingo