Review the license

[316k]

GPLv2 is a cool license, but there might be better options out there.

• If we care about copyleft : Maybe we should upgrade to GPLv3, since it would prevent a few problems, such as stopping the program from being distributed on an system which would block modified versions of the program. See this short article.
• If we don't care about copyleft : Then I'd suggest we use something simpler. I like putting my code under the MIT License, since it clearly and briefly says "Do what whatever you like with this software". It doesn't prevent people from using the code in non-free softwares, but it does prevent the licenses-incompatibility problem caused by copyleft licences. (You cannot combine GPLv2 code with GPLv3 code).
• If we don't care about copyleft, but we do care about funny things : It's always satisfying to put some code under the What the fuck Public License. This is a cool, extremely-permissive license which reminds that copyright is stupid and that you should be able to just do what the fuck you want with your computer. All 13 lines of the license here

I've put my preference in the reverse order :

1. Screw copyright. WTFPL
2. MIT License. It's used by jQuery and other big projects.
3. We should at least avoid the problems caused by the GPLv2.

Any thoughts ?

[316k]

Wait, since there are 8 contributors, the only options we have is to keep the GPLv2 or to migrate to the GPLv3...

[Agneli]

@316k, What's different between the two licenses? As the GPL can not be translated into Portuguese and there are many technical terms I do not know what's different between the two, could you explain better?

[316k]

The GPLv3 keeps the global idea behind the GPLv2 : free softwares with a strong copyleft clause. The changes are small, but might be significant in some specific situations. Here is an article by Richard Stallman : Why Upgrading to GPLv3.

To quote some passages :

One major danger that GPLv3 will block is tivoization. Tivoization means computers (called “appliances”) contain GPL-covered software that you can't change, because the appliance shuts down if it detects modified software. ... The manufacturers of these computers take advantage of the freedom that free software provides, but they don't let you do likewise. ... Further advantages of GPLv3 include better internationalization, gentler termination, support for BitTorrent, and compatibility with the Apache license. (For full information, see gplv3.fsf.org.) All in all, plenty of reason to upgrade.

There is also stuff about software patents, though I don't think it would affect the project.

[316k]

Ok, I just found out the Gaia code is released under the Apache v2 License, which isn't compatible with the GPLv2.

Gaia is the project that develops Firefox OS certified apps, and it includes good libraries for accessing currently Firefox OS-specific features, such as SMS and bluetooth.

I think it would be a good idea to migrate the license to the GPLv3.

[Agneli]

License changed in 4abb6bf

[316k]

Cool :)