On Wed, Jun 10, 2020 at 05:03:52PM -0400, Watson Ladd wrote:
On Wed, Jun 10, 2020 at 9:19 AM Miroslav Lichvar <mlichvar@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
Right. We would need to relicense the code. That would require consent
from Richard Curnow and all the contributors. If someone thought it
was realistic and wanted to do all the work, I'd not be against it.
I've only found 14 contributors from grepping for copyright
statements, but there may be more.
The number of authors from the git log is about 34 (some authors have
used slightly different names). When I update the copyright years in
the files before a final release, I try to ignore changes with fewer
than 10 lines of code. This is, or at least was at some point, a
recommended pratice. I don't know if the same rule can be applied to
relicensing.
If we do do this GPL v3 or later might be worthwhile so we don't need
to do it in the future.
Is GPLv4 going to be a thing? I think people might prefer
a GPLv2->GPLv3-only switch over GPLv2->GPLv3+ to avoid uncertainty.