Even in the worst case scenario, it remains available under the original license, and that's not going to change.
What is the worst case scenario, by the way? You could say it depends on who you are. One such scenario would be for developers who agree with the FSF's strong copyleft philosophy who are betrayed by a future hypothetical revision that removes all copyleft provisions to make it no stronger than, e.g., BSD. This affects only a subset of those choosing a license for their project. (I.e., if you don't care about copyleft, this purportedly horrific thing doesn't even affect you.) Funnily enough, the subset of those who would be affected are hardly ever the ones I see making the argument you are.
So what terrible things do you imagine the worst case scenario involving?
I would like to know that too, since all the worst case scenario I can think of is also defining aspects of permissive licensed projects.
For example, a community could fork a project and license it under a new'er version, and then the original founder could suddenly want to incorporate the new changes but at the same time not want to use the new license, and the new community refuses request for a license to the old version. I don't think it ever has happen with a gplv2+ project, and it require a quite hostile community to begin with, but as a worst case scenario that would likely be it.
Comments
Even in the worst case scenario, it remains available under the original license, and that's not going to change.
What is the worst case scenario, by the way? You could say it depends on who you are. One such scenario would be for developers who agree with the FSF's strong copyleft philosophy who are betrayed by a future hypothetical revision that removes all copyleft provisions to make it no stronger than, e.g., BSD. This affects only a subset of those choosing a license for their project. (I.e., if you don't care about copyleft, this purportedly horrific thing doesn't even affect you.) Funnily enough, the subset of those who would be affected are hardly ever the ones I see making the argument you are.
So what terrible things do you imagine the worst case scenario involving?
I would like to know that too, since all the worst case scenario I can think of is also defining aspects of permissive licensed projects.
For example, a community could fork a project and license it under a new'er version, and then the original founder could suddenly want to incorporate the new changes but at the same time not want to use the new license, and the new community refuses request for a license to the old version. I don't think it ever has happen with a gplv2+ project, and it require a quite hostile community to begin with, but as a worst case scenario that would likely be it.