On Tue, 20 Jun 2006 23:48:53 -0500 Les Mikesell <lesmikesell@xxxxxxxxx> wrote: > If you really believe that, why apply the GPL restrictions? Let > people reuse it and improve it any way they can. X probably > wouldn't exist as a GPL'd work - or NFS, yet they now are > available for everyone. Authors that choose the GPL often simply want to know that they'll have access to any changes others (who want to distribute) make to their code. But Les, PLEASE OFFER A SOLUTION. All you're doing is complaining. What is your solution? Do you have one or are you just going to keep complaining about the GPL? > Even Bill Gates sometimes does charity work... > > The more interesting issue is what happens when the 2 idealistic > pursuits you've mentioned clash? That is, do you deprive the > people you would like to help with this software by making a system > that cannot use technologies under different licensing (mp3/mpeg > and many others) because of the GPL restrictions or will you > condescend to something like perl's dual license to allow it to > be improved in any way someone would like? There is no way to accommodate the needs of everyone. The GPL makes certain trade offs, other licenses make other trade offs. People who like the GPL will continue to use it. And it seems to be working to produce software that even people who hate the GPL seem to enjoy using, so it can't really be all that broken. Sean
