“[…] to make the source available under the same terms.”
You are omitting what is probably the most important part of the GPL.
You are omitting what is probably the most important part of the GPL.
I disagree that it is an important thing about what is its intent
If I'm choosing a license for a project, it's important that I know that changes other people make will be available to me under the same terms as my own code.
A license that requires you to make the changes available but allows you to restrict my use of those changes is plainly in contrast with the intent of the GPL.
better ?
(sure, there is a tradeoff between comprehensibility and precision ...)