Hi, On 24 February 2012 21:20, Miles Bader <[email protected]> wrote: > Some xorg contributors have expressed what are essentially irrational > objections to even _using_ GPLv3 tools. > > The one I encountered previously was from Apple, and apparently Apple > itself is pushing this crap (whether due to ignorance or simply spite, > I don't know).
I wouldn't single Apple out. It's a very very common objection - I can't even count the number of companies I know who refuse to touch GPLv3 code and roll back to GPLv2 so they are completely clean, on two hands, let alone one. As a general rule, large legal departments are absolutely terrified of GPLv3. > I'm not sure why such people have been accorded veto power over what > xorg itself does... For exactly the same reason that OpenBSD had a veto over the v1 patchset because they want xkbcommon to be buildable with the BSD-licensed lex/yacc, and have had in the past over GNU make extensions. Apple are also a very prolific and very useful contributor to the X server, so I'm really not too interested in putting them in a position where their legal department says they have to fork. Cheers, Daniel _______________________________________________ [email protected]: X.Org development Archives: http://lists.x.org/archives/xorg-devel Info: http://lists.x.org/mailman/listinfo/xorg-devel
