>> Linux has been contributed to by thousands of authors at this point, 
>> each of them sublicensing their code back under GPL2. Many of them are now dead. 

Dangerous business, this Linux coding, eh?
<grin>

Linux has been contributed to by thousands of authors at this point, each of them sublicensing their code back under GPL2. Many of them are now dead.

Changing Linux to GPL2 has never been an option.


It's only the anti-DRM provisions that he's opposed to - he's said on the LKML that he's fine with the rest. Basically, he doesn't like the fact that the software license talks about hardware.

The kernel is a key technology. Linus holds the keys to that. Other technologies are also key. Other people hold the keys to that. Some have gone to v3 already. Some have stayed with v2. It doesn't matter. If you license the kernel under v2 and then SAMBA under v3 then you are effectively tied to v3. Which is the key here. The kernel is standardized and widely available on many platforms and v2 is fine for it. But other technologies such as SAMBA extremely key to using the kernel in whatever environment. So, just having SAMBA under v3 is enough to keep the likes of Novell from abusing the system.

Not to mention there can always be a v4 and v5. No one said we have stopped at v3. It may take a few more years but expect some variations on v3 sometime.

I thought that St. Steve of Cupertino was the creator of all good that comes to us?

Surely, Torvalds cannot be a God as well.

Unless this be one of them polytheistic sites and if so I am never coming back.

By the way, if Torvalds is God of Linux and Steve is God of Everything else... what be Mr. Gates?

Is he 'akuma' ?
I knew there was good reason to stay away from PC's.

Still there can be only one God so figure it out Inq. or you'll face excommunication by the bible belt.