For Approval: GPLv3

Dag-Erling Smørgrav des at
Thu Aug 9 09:33:19 UTC 2007

Matthew Flaschen <matthew.flaschen at> writes:
> "Wilson, Andrew" <andrew.wilson at> writes:
> > To my mind, this is one of the true ideological differentiators between
> > "open source" and "free SW."  Open source is about growing the commons; free SW as
> > espoused by FSF & RMS is about creating a maximally free class of SW, and
> > maximizing utility of that free SW with the existing FLOSS base for the sake of
> > growing a commons is a non-goal for them.
> I think this is quite incorrect.  The FSF spent significant effort in
> making GPLv3 compatible with Apache and in eliminating other
> compatibility problems.  And they have always maintained a list of
> licenses compatible with the GPL.

You have a short memory, or maybe you weren't around when the GNOME
project was started, or when Stallman later stabbed Trolltech in the
back after they had spent considerable time and effort making their
license GPL compatible, or when he announced that enough people had
swallowed the LGPL bait and glibc should switch to the GPL (luckily,
the glibc maintainers declined).

Dag-Erling Smørgrav
Senior Software Developer
Linpro AS -

More information about the License-discuss mailing list