Re: FC4 or FC5

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

 



On Fri, 2006-06-16 at 14:25 -0400, Sean wrote:

> > That's not clear at all.  There's plenty of useful software with
> > less restrictive licenses and not much to demonstrate any
> > cause and effect between the GPL and development.   X and nfs
> > probably wouldn't have been created at all under GPL; perl wisely
> > uses a dual license to avoid being locked in or out of either camp.
> 
> The proof is that there are authors that choose the GPL because
> it makes sense to them.

Proof of what?  There are also authors that choose less restrictive
licenses.  

> The fact that many of these projects
> develop healthy ecosystems is enough for me to believe in the GPL.

Then apache, the *bsd's, etc. must be enough to show that
the GPL is not necessary.

> But there are other good open source licenses too, and there is
> a place where proprietary licenses make sense too.  But I sure
> don't see any of that as a reason to work up an anger against
> anyone that chooses the GPL, its their business.

Yes, or it is their political statement...  I'm just happy that
dual-licensed projects like perl understand that it is not
necessary to play that game, and like to point out that the
restrictions can be a problem.  Some projects might use the
GPL just because it has its own public relations foundation
and they've heard of it rather than really wanting to add
the restrictions.

-- 
  Les Mikesell
   lesmikesell@xxxxxxxxx



[Index of Archives]     [Current Fedora Users]     [Fedora Desktop]     [Fedora SELinux]     [Yosemite News]     [Yosemite Photos]     [KDE Users]     [Fedora Tools]     [Fedora Docs]

  Powered by Linux