On Aug 31, 2007, at 11:40 AM, David Strauss wrote:
The license itself says, "Everyone is permitted to copy and distribute verbatim copies of this license document, but changing it is not allowed." Paragraph 6 says nothing about producing a modified version of the GPL. MySQL's exception is rendered as a separate exception document, not a modification of the GPL. This distinction is important because people redistributing the code aren't obligated to allow the exceptions granted by the original licensor.
So, I stand by my statement that, "Direct GPL variants are only allowed with approval of the FSF." See the AGPL for an example of an approved variant.
The 'exception document' is an interesting idea, and I'd like to explore this concept further with some advice from the FSF. We don't want to create an altered version of the GPL (obviously), but I wonder if the exception document would make sense to include in Drupal's default download, clarifying some things like the status of theme template files, 'intermediate' integration modules, etc. As noted by the FSF, however, it's difficult to open the door to integration modules 'officially' without opening the door to closed- source modules. It becomes easy for someone to simply build their functionality as a closed source module, and wrap it in a 'compatibility layer' rather than engaging with the community and participating in the sharing of code and resources that has made the Drupal world thrive. --Jeff