GPL vs GPLv3

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

 



Hi

I write a little code from time to time. I just discovered that at least some of it is still under GPL. Now I'm thinking about changing that to GPLv3.

1) Can I Just Do It, simply by stating on the webpage and/or in the software that it's under GPLv3.

2) Is it (as I understand from http://www.gnu.org/licenses/rms-why-gplv3.html) recommended to change to GPLv3? What are the main advantages (both for the community and me) with GPLv3 and are there any drawbacks?

NB: I *did* try to read + understand the text on the GPL webpage, but it's a little too much for me. So I'm hoping for some simple pointers and recommendations.

NB2: I also wrote some "patches" for various synths and stuff like that. I know it's been brought up here before, but forgot the answers. Could that be released under GPL(v3) as well or is it better to use CC, and if so which dialect is recommended? The "patches" are everything from ams presets, zyn presets, pd patches + externals, csound/blue code and some more I might have forgotten.

--
Atte

http://atte.dk   http://modlys.dk
_______________________________________________
Linux-audio-user mailing list
Linux-audio-user@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
http://lists.linuxaudio.org/listinfo/linux-audio-user


[Index of Archives]     [Linux Sound]     [ALSA Users]     [Pulse Audio]     [ALSA Devel]     [Sox Users]     [Linux Media]     [Kernel]     [Photo Sharing]     [Gimp]     [Yosemite News]     [Linux Media]

  Powered by Linux