Also note that the only valid version of the GPL as far as the kernel
is concerned is _this_ particular version of the license (ie v2, not
v2.2 or v3.x or whatever), unless explicitly otherwise stated.
I think it's insane to require people to make their private signing keys available, for example. I wouldn't do it. So I don't think the GPL v3 conversion is going to happen for the kernel, since I personally don't want to convert any of my code.
その路線を変更するつもりもない、らしいっす。
ところで
require people to make their private signing keys available
って何のことなんでしょう?詳しい人教えて
既定路線では? (スコア:5, すばらしい洞察)
Re:既定路線では? (スコア:2, 参考になる)
I think it's insane to require people to make their private signing keys available, for example. I wouldn't do it. So I don't think the GPL v3 conversion is going to happen for the kernel, since I personally don't want to convert any of my code.
その路線を変更するつもりもない、らしいっす。 ところで
require people to make their private signing keys available
って何のことなんでしょう?詳しい人教えて
Re:既定路線では? (スコア:0)
Re:既定路線では? (スコア:0)
素直に「秘密鍵を公開しろ!」っていう文言があるのか
と探してしまいましたよ…
Re:既定路線では? (スコア:1, 興味深い)
"Complete Corresponding Source Code" に関して署名付きバイナリの話が
http://gplv3.fsf.org/comments に書いてありました。