ffc team mailing list archive

[Anders Logg <logg@xxxxxxxxx>]

> Anders, can you summarize the differences between v2 and v3?

Basically, it's the same license as before (modified distributed 
versions also need to be free and GPL). But two things have been added:

1. If you put GPL software in a consumer product (like a TiVo) then a 
user must be able to modify the software (when that is possible, if it's 
burnt in ROM it's not possible). So you can't disallow changes to the 
software by shutting down if a checksum has changed for example.

2. If you give a patent license (I won't sue you for using this patent) 
to a group of users as part of distributing GPL software, then you must 
give the patent license to everyone that receives the software. (So you 
can't make an exclusive patent deal like MS and Novell did.)

Other than that, there are some legalese improvements in the text and 
internationalization.

/Anders


> On 7/23/07, *Anders Logg* <logg@xxxxxxxxx <mailto:logg@xxxxxxxxx>> wrote:
>
>     I would like to upgrade the license of FFC to GPL v3.
>
>     I found the following list of contributors:
>
>          Johan Jansson
>          Robert C. Kirby
>          Matthew G. Knepley
>          Dag Lindbo
>          Kristian Oelgaard
>          Marie Rognes
>          Ola Skavhaug
>          Andy R. Terrel
>          Garth N. Wells
>
>     I need confirmation from everyone on this list that changing the
>     license
>     is ok. (And please tell me if someone is missing.)
>
>     There is much to read about GPL v3, see for example
>
>          http://gplv3.fsf.org/
>          http://www.gnu.org/copyleft/gpl.html
>
>     I read it and I think it looks good.
>
>     I also would like to change the wording of the per-file license
>     statement to
>
>          GNU GPL Version 3 or later
>
>     and the global license statement to
>
>          This program is free software: you can redistribute it and/or
>     modify
>          it under the terms of the GNU General Public License as
>     published by
>          the Free Software Foundation, either version 3 of the License, or
>          (at your option) any later version.
>
>     In principle, it may be dangerous giving a third party free hands to
>     decide on a future license without us looking at it first. But I'm not
>     so worried about that, and if FSF publish GPL v4 in 10 years and it's
>     very bad, then we may just say GPL v3 only for any future releases
>     of FFC...
>
>     /Anders
>     _______________________________________________
>     FFC-dev mailing list
>     FFC-dev@xxxxxxxxxx <mailto:FFC-dev@xxxxxxxxxx>
>     http://www.fenics.org/mailman/listinfo/ffc-dev