--- El vie, 8/19/11, Juan Carlos Gentile <[email protected]> escribió:
De: Juan Carlos Gentile <[email protected]> Asunto: Re: [Solar-general] "no ideologicemos el concepto de software público " A: "La lista de todos y todas en solar" <[email protected]> Fecha: viernes, 19 de agosto de 2011, 04:00 pm On Thursday 18 August 2011, Diego Saravia wrote:
aun desde una filosofia talibana del SL,
eso es un insulto. que tienen que ver los talibanes con el soft libre?
yo creo que HAY que ideologizar el tema,
El tema es ideologico, lamentablemente, en el sentido marxista y peyorativo de la ideologia
es decir ideologia es lo que no es ciencia
lo que hay que hacer es politizar el tema
lo que quedo claro en estas jornadas que hay un fuerte criterio, que seguramente pasara a ser el mas sustentable, que la licencia basica debe ser la GPL v 2.0,
por que no 3.0?
mira esto:
droid GPLv2 termination worries: one more reason to upgrade to GPLv3 From: "Free Software Foundation" <[email protected]> To: Hipatia <[email protected]>
Distributors lose their rights when they violate GPLv2, but the Free Software Foundation is more forgiving in its license enforcement to encourage continued participation in the free software community. GPLv3 has improved termination provisions to codify this approach, giving developers one more reason to upgrade.
Thanks to Android's commercial success, the kernel Linux, which is released under the GNU General Public License (GPL) version 2, is being distributed more than ever before. Whenever someone distributes GPL-covered software, they must follow a few conditions set forth in the license. These conditions try to give anyone who receives the software both the legal permission and the practical tools necessary to change and share the software themselves if they wish.
Not all of the companies that distribute Android heed these conditions. We've witnessed an uptick in GPL violation reports--some convincing, others incomplete or misinformed--against these vendors. We generally can't pursue these violations directly, because only copyright holders can enforce free software licenses in most countries, and few Android devices use FSF-copyrighted code. However, people still seek out our opinions about the relevant parts of the GPL, and that discussion has recently turned to GPLv2's termination provisions. Section 4 of the license says, "You may not copy, modify, sublicense, or distribute the Program except as expressly provided under this License. Any attempt otherwise to copy, modify, sublicense or distribute the Program is void, and will automatically terminate your rights under this License."
es cierto lo que aclaras ! uno de los criterios para referir la v2 es que de esta se puede pasar a una v3, pero no a la inversa, pero no es algo que no es un dogma, por el contrario, estimo que aportes como los que has hecho ayudaran a tener mejores opciones...