GPL License with clause for Web use?

MJ Ray mjr at
Wed Nov 21 18:03:23 UTC 2007

simo <simo.sorce at> wrote:
> On Wed, 2007-11-21 at 15:34 +0000, MJ Ray wrote:
> > By the way, the GPLv3 AGPL-friendly clause is only friendly to AGPLv3,
> > so what happens when AGPLv4 or AGPLv3.1 comes out?  Oops?
> I guess that is on purpose, and I don't think we will ever see AGPLv3.x
> before GPLv3.x as they are in essence the same license with an added
> requirement. [...]

Unless the added requirement is shown to be fluffed.  Needing a new
GPL to fix a problem in AGPL's AGPL-specific parts seems like a bug.

> That's why the FSF promotes the "or later"
> clause, just because it makes it easier to upgrade if you want later,
> without the need to re-license.

Yes, that one thing that makes it so surprising that FSF didn't use an
"or later" clause in the licence!

So if a .1 of either licence appears, GPL/AGPL-mixes have to wait
until all constituent projects have bumped to .1 - like the current
GPL/LGPL 2/3 messes, but possibly worse.

MJ Ray tel:+44-844-4437-237 -
Webmaster-developer, statistician, sysadmin, online shop builder,
consumer and workers co-operative member -
Writing on koha, debian, sat TV, Kewstoke

More information about the Discussion mailing list