Re: GPL v3? Other license options?

["Chris Travers" <..hidden..>]

BTW, I have changed my mind after yet another reading of the GPL v3.  There is almost no way I will support a move to this license.  I have found that problems I have had with earier drafts over additional restrictions to code being added by other people are still present in the released license.  

I do NOT want to release the software under a license which might allow other people to further restrict our code beyond what we decide as a project.  Therefore my position is "it is going to be very hard to convince me to move."  I still won't say "never" but my support for moving would essentially require an existential threat to the project that other means could not allieviate.

I also am going to make a suggestion that we find out what the Canadian definition of "derivative works" is.  It is becoming increasingly clear to me that dynamic linking to libraries is not restricted and this may be why the GPL v3 has moved away from a mere reliance on "derivative works" standards to a requirement of distribution of additional source packages under terms which can be relicensed to *exactly* those restrictions and permissions in the GPL (not a superset thereof).  We may not  be affected by our dependencies after all and may be far better off staying with the GPL 2 only.

Best Wishes,
Chris Travers