[OPEN-ILS-DOCUMENTATION] GPL version for code in documentation (was: Please Vote on Evergreen Documentation Licensing)

[Karen Collier]

I think I may have misunderstood Dan's post and given a too hasty reply.  Do we need some discussion on the merits of GPL version 2 or higher versus GPL version 3 or higher before continuing the vote on part 2 of the proposed licensing?  Does anyone have an opinion on the matter one way or the other?  Or any insights to offer?

Thanks,
Karen

----- "Karen Collier" <kcollier at kent.lib.md.us> wrote:

> I think the intent of using the GPL, at least in my eyes, was to keep
> the Evergreen code base and any code in the documentation in sync as
> far as licensing goes.  It was purely by accident that I linked to a
> specific version of the GPL, and that it turned out not to be the one
> the Evergreen code uses.  Oops!
> 
> Let's continue the vote with the understanding that we're referring to
> the same version of the GPL that the Evergreen code base uses.  For
> simplicity, let's have those who have already voted, speak up only if
> this clarification changes your vote.  Is this agreeable?
> 
> Thanks for pointing this out Dan.  I'll be sure to use your language
> when I put together official licensing statements.
> 
> Karen
> 
> ----- "Dan Scott" <dan at coffeecode.net> wrote:
> 
> > On Mon, 2009-12-21 at 11:06 -0500, Karen Collier wrote:
> > > As discussed at the Documentation Interest Group Meeting on
> > December, 9, 2009, I am calling for a vote on Documentation
> Licensing.
> >  Members of the Documentation Interest Group and interested members
> of
> > the Evergreen Community, please vote yes or no on the following
> > proposals by Monday, January 4, 2009 by replying to this email on
> the
> > Evergreen Documentation mailing list
> > (open-ils-documentation at list.georgialibraries.org).
> > > 
> > > 1 - Official Evergreen Documentation produced by the
> Documentation
> > Interest Group should be licensed under the Creative Commons
> > Attribution Share-Alike 3.0 License
> > (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/3.0/).
> > > 
> > > 2 - Any code included in the official documentation produced by
> the
> > Documentation Interest Group should also be made available under
> the
> > GNU GPL (http://www.gnu.org/licenses/gpl.html).
> > 
> > I have to point out one small technicality; the version of the GNU
> > GPL
> > that is linked to is the GPL v3.0, whereas the OpenSRF and
> Evergreen
> > code is GPL v2 or later (I _think_ we've applied the "or, at your
> > option, any later version" redistribution clause consistently, when
> > we
> > have included the license header in source files).
> > 
> > Oddly enough, the GPL v2 and GPL v3.0 are incompatible according to
> > the
> > creators of those licenses; to use code licensed under "GPL v2 or
> > later"
> > with GPL v3.0 code, one must choose the "or later" option and
> > relicense
> > the code under the GPL v3.0.
> > 
> > I'm not opposed to the GPL v3.0 - among its benefits, it adds
> > explicit
> > patent grants where the GPL v2 only carries an implicit patent
> grant,
> > and is written to comply with copyright laws worldwide instead of
> > only
> > American copyright law - but we might want to keep the same "GPL
> v2,
> > or
> > at your option, any later version" redistribution clause for the
> code
> > in
> > the documentation, simply to keep it in sync with the OpenSRF /
> > Evergreen code base. Then, if at some point the project opts to
> move
> > to
> > the GPL v3, we can bring the documentation along too.
> > 
> > My apologies for not providing this clarification earlier. Can we
> > consider the following a friendly amendment to the proposals?
> > 
> > Change:
> > 
> > 2 - Any code included in the official documentation produced by the
> > Documentation Interest Group should also be made available under
> the
> > GNU
> > GPL (http://www.gnu.org/licenses/gpl.html).
> > 
> > To:
> > 
> > 2 - Any code included in the official documentation produced by the
> > Documentation Interest Group should also be made available under
> the
> > GNU
> > GPL version 2
> > (http://www.gnu.org/licenses/old-licenses/gpl-2.0.html),
> > including the "or, at your option, any later version"
> redistribution
> > clause.
> > 
> > _______________________________________________
> > OPEN-ILS-DOCUMENTATION mailing list
> > OPEN-ILS-DOCUMENTATION at list.georgialibraries.org
> >
> http://list.georgialibraries.org/mailman/listinfo/open-ils-documentation
> 
> -- 
> Karen Collier
> Public Services Librarian
> Kent County Public Library
> 408 High Street
> Chestertown, MD 21620
> 410-778-3636
> _______________________________________________
> OPEN-ILS-DOCUMENTATION mailing list
> OPEN-ILS-DOCUMENTATION at list.georgialibraries.org
> http://list.georgialibraries.org/mailman/listinfo/open-ils-documentation

-- 
Karen Collier
Public Services Librarian
Kent County Public Library
408 High Street
Chestertown, MD 21620
410-778-3636