License change for the GPH.

Werner Koch wk at
Tue Oct 22 09:49:08 CEST 2013

On Tue, 22 Oct 2013 03:25, rms at said:

> Please don't ask them to do that.  As a public rejection of our
> lciense, that would hurt the GNU Project as a whole.  And it would not

Fortunately this is already in the works.

I can tell what really hurts the GNU project: The stubbornness of
keeping tight control over everything with the result that people try to
get out of the way of everything which is related to the FSF - GPLv3
inclusive.  Recall the GCC plugin discussion with the final outcome that
most research is now done with LLVM and we actually helped Apple to get
their semi-proprietary stuff mainstream.

I have had hard times explaining why the GPLv3 is good for everyone -
despite that there are really sound arguments in favor of the GPLv3.  I
can't tell a single argument why the FDL is better than CC-by-sa or GPL.
Still you are requesting the use of the FDL for all FSF related
documentation. Luckily we never implemented that for the GnuPG included

> There are many solutions to a problem like this.  I looking for a

For example working with CC to make the FDL compatible to CC-by-sa but
then one could also simple switch to CC-by-sa.



Die Gedanken sind frei.  Ausnahmen regelt ein Bundesgesetz.

More information about the Gnupg-doc mailing list