Question 1

What is the difference between GPL-2.0-only and GPL-3.0-only?

Accepted Answer

GPL-2.0-only and GPL-3.0-only reach the same verdict for every way of shipping software. What separates them is not the obligation to disclose source.

Question 2

For hosted saas, is GPL-2.0-only or GPL-3.0-only more restrictive?

Accepted Answer

GPL-2.0-only: GPL-2.0-only triggers its obligations on distribution. Your distribution model is hosted SaaS, which is not distribution, so no obligation arises today. Shipping this software later — on-premises delivery, a binary, or a published library — would trigger whole-work source disclosure. GPL-3.0-only: GPL-3.0-only triggers its obligations on distribution. Your distribution model is hosted SaaS, which is not distribution, so no obligation arises today. Shipping this software later — on-premises delivery, a binary, or a published library — would trigger whole-work source disclosure.

Question 3

For distributed binary, is GPL-2.0-only or GPL-3.0-only more restrictive?

Accepted Answer

GPL-2.0-only: GPL-2.0-only requires that a work incorporating it, when distributed, be licensed as a whole under the same terms with corresponding source made available. Your distribution model is distributed binary or application, which triggers that obligation. GPL-3.0-only: GPL-3.0-only requires that a work incorporating it, when distributed, be licensed as a whole under the same terms with corresponding source made available. Your distribution model is distributed binary or application, which triggers that obligation.

Question 4

For on-premises delivery, is GPL-2.0-only or GPL-3.0-only more restrictive?

Accepted Answer

GPL-2.0-only: GPL-2.0-only requires that a work incorporating it, when distributed, be licensed as a whole under the same terms with corresponding source made available. Your distribution model is software delivered to a customer environment, which triggers that obligation. GPL-3.0-only: GPL-3.0-only requires that a work incorporating it, when distributed, be licensed as a whole under the same terms with corresponding source made available. Your distribution model is software delivered to a customer environment, which triggers that obligation.

Question 5

For internal use only, is GPL-2.0-only or GPL-3.0-only more restrictive?

Accepted Answer

GPL-2.0-only: GPL-2.0-only triggers its obligations on distribution. Your distribution model is internal use only, which is not distribution, so no obligation arises today. Shipping this software later — on-premises delivery, a binary, or a published library — would trigger whole-work source disclosure. GPL-3.0-only: GPL-3.0-only triggers its obligations on distribution. Your distribution model is internal use only, which is not distribution, so no obligation arises today. Shipping this software later — on-premises delivery, a binary, or a published library — would trigger whole-work source disclosure.

Question 6

For published library, is GPL-2.0-only or GPL-3.0-only more restrictive?

Accepted Answer

GPL-2.0-only: GPL-2.0-only requires that a work incorporating it, when distributed, be licensed as a whole under the same terms with corresponding source made available. Your distribution model is a published library, which triggers that obligation. GPL-3.0-only: GPL-3.0-only requires that a work incorporating it, when distributed, be licensed as a whole under the same terms with corresponding source made available. Your distribution model is a published library, which triggers that obligation.

How you ship	GPL-2.0-only	GPL-3.0-only
Hosted SaaS	No obligation	No obligation	Same
Distributed binary	Obligation triggered	Obligation triggered	Same
On-premises delivery	Obligation triggered	Obligation triggered	Same
Internal use only	No obligation	No obligation	Same
Published library	Obligation triggered	Obligation triggered	Same

GPL-2.0-only vs GPL-3.0-only

Can you use them, and where?

Side by side

GPL-2.0-only

GPL-3.0-only