Something about GPLv3铪铪铪

来源:互联网 发布:js遮罩层 编辑:程序博客网 时间:2024/04/28 11:42
这里是一个供public review的GPLv3 Beta2 AJAX页面,非常酷, 任何人都可以对其中的某一段添加评论,背景好色的深浅显示了评论的数量多少,从而可以对其中最有争议的地方一目了然。不过我觉得这个网页显然还是对于目前争论的热度过于保守...

GPLv3的最新一轮争吵依然集中在以Linus为代表的Linux Kernel开发者与FSF的GPLv3支持者中间,但是这一次一些Big Name比如Sun的COSO(Chief Open Source Officer)Simon Phipps也明确表示了关注(在Sun开源JDK在即而license依然悬而未决之际不禁让人浮想联翩)。据我不完全观察,战火集中在LKML, Greklaw, 并波及LWN, linux.com等.

不知道哪位达人可以明确一下本次战役的起因,我认为很可能是9月22日公布的Linux Kernel开发者针对GPL的投票结果,说实话尽管有心理准备,我还是很惊讶如此一边倒的结果:

Vote key:

I wouldn't want to use v3 (I really dislike it, or my
company would have serious problems allowing me
-3 to participate using the v3 draft)

-2 I think v3 is much worse than v2

-1 I think v2 is better, but I don't care that deeply

0 I don't really care at all

1 I think v3 is better, but I don't care that deeply

2 I think v3 is much better than v2

I wouldn't want to use v2 (I really dislike it, or my
company would have serious problems allowing me
3 to participate using the GPLv2)

These votes are opinions of the persons listed in their capacities as
kernel maintainers only. In no regard should any opinion expressed
herein be construed to represent the views of any entities employing
or being associated with any of the authors.

Name Vote
==== ====
Linus Torvalds -2.5
Alan Cox -2.0
James Bottomley -3.0
Ingo Molnar -1.0
Tony Luck -2.0
Neil Brown -1.0
Al Viro -2.0
Jeff Garzik -2.0
Mauro Carvalho Chehab -2.0
Arjan van de Ven -3.0
David Woodhouse -2.0
Greg Kroah Hartman -3.0
Ralf Baechle -1.5
Stephen Hemminger -2.0
Andrew Morton -3.0
Dmitry Torokhov -2.0
Tejun Heo -2.0
Thomas Gleixner -3.0
Takashi Iwai -2.0
Trond Myklebust -2.5
Roland Dreier -2.0
Dave Jones -2.0
Russell King -2.0
John W. Linville -2.0
Andi Kleen -2.0
Patrick McHardy -1.0
David S. Miller 0.0
Christoph Hellwig -2.0
Paul Mackerras -1.0

Total Votes Cast 29
Average Vote -2.0 +/- 0.7
Lowest Vote -3.0
Highest Vote 0.0
Median Vote -2.0


之后开源社区自然一片哗然,并且迅速带着自己的立场义无反顾跳进了这个堪称今年FOSS社区最大的坑里。本来本着一个业余观察员的职业精神,我还打算梳理一下争论的脉络,但是很快力不从心了,把一些link贴在这里,有兴趣的tx自己看吧:

LWN之前的声明: Kernel developers' position on GPLv3
LinuxWatch的新闻: GPLv3 could kill open source, top Linux dev's warn
Linus: 在Groklaw的发言,  在LKML则更明确的表明了自己对FSF的态度, 在Linux.com的访谈,Linus在LKML和Groklaw上面还参与很多的争论,无法一一贴出。
FSF对投票的官方回应:GPLv3: recent misleading information
Kaffe作者Dalibor Topic将投票称为Drama, 这篇V3 for Vendetta则反击了Linus对FSF的说法,特别讨论了GPL和Apache License的兼容问题(V for Vendetta非常不错,IMDB8.2分可为佐证,推荐一下,第三集就不知道如何了)
Eben Moglen, GPLv3 process的chief mediator, 站出来再一次邀请kernel开发者参与GPLv3的讨论,但是在激战正酣的时候调停的努力只会开辟另一个战场,有跟贴长度为证.
Linux Journal上的这篇blog的观点我比较认同
最后,虽然毫不相关,但是ASF最近也对Source Header and Copyright Notice Policy做了调整.

尽管对前因后果依然不敢说了了,我还是想表明一下自己微不足道的态度: Linux开发者有权选择自己的license,尽管鉴于Linux在FOSS的地位,其开发者抱着积极的态度参与GPLv3进程的讨论是几乎所有开源社区(包括我)对他们的期望,但是他们确实没有满足大家这类欲望的义务,就像开源软件和开源社区本身,没有义务,只有interest, 也正如Linus在这次论战中说的:"It's not a democracy. Copyright is a _right_. Authors matter." 然而,Linus对于FSF的指责似乎过于尖锐和主观了一些,不过在FOSS,这样的言语并不鲜见,如果大家都是温文尔雅不动声色如Simon Phipps或者Bob Sutor,FOSS也许根本就不会存在。


原创粉丝点击