xgettext (Re: replication of stuff in /usr/gnu)

[Nicolas Williams]

Responding out of order.

On Fri, Jul 13, 2007 at 08:39:42AM -0700, Darren.Reed at Sun.COM wrote:
> Nicolas Williams wrote:

> This is why I would recommend caution in introducing any new
> GPLv2 packages that come from the FSF or depend tightly on
> things that come from the FSF.

No, the ones to be cautious are Sun Legal and the ARC -- developers need
only follow the process.  We submit the OSR and run the ARC case; Sun
Legal approves or denies.  It's that simple.  I don't want to spend any
more time arguing about whether the GPLv3 threatens our ability to use
GPLv2 code when we have a Legal support team whose job it is to evaluate
the lincense and type of use in question.

> Although people are taking steps to create repositories of some
> critical GPLv2 things (gcc, gdb, etc) before they switch over to
> GPLv3, nobody yet knows what the future of that will be, whether
> it is code forks or something else.

Forking the GNU xgettext or extending ours would be a last resort if the
FSF re-releases the gettext tools under GPLv3 and Sun Legal says we
can't ship or use the GPLv3'ed version.

I think forking GNU xgettext will be better than extending our xgettext.
We already have several consolidations and some things in ON even that
depend on the GNU version, and the extensions are non-trivial.

> >The GPLv2'ed versions can still be used.
> 
> But if they become GPLv3 and GPLv3 is unpalatable then the future

This is what the GPLv2 says:

9. The Free Software Foundation may publish revised and/or new versions
   of the General Public License from time to time.  Such new versions
   will be similar in spirit to the present version, but may differ in
   detail to address new problems or concerns.

   Each version is given a distinguishing version number.  If the
   Program specifies a version number of this License which applies to
   it and "any later version", you have the option of following the
   terms and conditions either of that version or of any later version
   published by the Free Software Foundation.  If the Program does not
   specify a version number of this License, you may choose any version
   ever published by the Free Software Foundation.

"..., you have the option of following the terms and conditions either
of that version or of any later version..."

I think that's pretty darn clear, to lawyers and non-lawyers alike.

Put another way, why would Sun Legal have approved *any* GPLv2 programs
for use and/or distribution by Sun in Sun products, in development,
etcetera, if item (9) said something more like "..., future versions
automatically supercede earlier versions..."???

Note, that question is rhetorical, and you can't answer it to my
satisfaction.  Let's let Sun Legal take care of this, shall we?

Nico
--