Re: Instead of GPL License - Why not LKL? (Linux Kernel License)

[Marc Perkel]

--- Kevin Bowling <lkml@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote:

> 
> If I'm not mistaken, the OP is suggesting that the
> name simply be
> changed from GPL to LKL to avoid confusion of GPL2
> vs GPL3.  Same
> verbiage, different name.  If these FSF loonies keep
> cutting into our
> corner of pragmatism, I am inclined to agree :-).
> 

Yes - that is exactly what I'm suggesting. If the
agreement is the same but the name of the agreement
changes I don't think you would have that much of a
transition. GPL2=LKL. But the confusion created by FSF
would go away.

If Linux is staying with GPL2 then this would signal
to the world that there's a fork and that Linux is
going in a different direction.



       
____________________________________________________________________________________
Got a little couch potato? 
Check out fun summer activities for kids.
http://search.yahoo.com/search?fr=oni_on_mail&p=summer+activities+for+kids&cs=bz 
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/