On Tue, 2006-06-20 at 23:48 -0500, Les Mikesell wrote: > On Tue, 2006-06-20 at 23:09, Ric Moore wrote: > > > My original point is that if something is broken and someone can fix > > it... it may help others, in unforeseen ways, to try to improve things a > > bit which may come full circle back to you to improve your own life. > > 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. > > > I > > have no problem with the GPL on that basis. For me, it keeps it free and > > Bill Gates can't get his hands on it. <evil grin> Ric > > Even Bill Gates sometimes does charity work... ---- actually, not only can Microsoft (which is what I assume is meant by Bill Gates) can put their hands on it...according to this months Linux Journal, they are currently running 15 different versions of BSD and 30 different versions of Linux in their office for open source collaboration. They of course are free to use it, integrate with it, develop software for it, much the same for anyone else in this world. As for the charitable nature of Bill Gates, that is standard fare for those who suffer the embarrassment of riches, such the course set by John D. Rockefeller...let's not divert into another direction on this thread. ---- > > 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? ---- Regardless of any point you make, you have no point to make. Linux is GPL and will always be thus. This is a Linux list. The subject license is that which is chosen by whomever owns the code...period. If you write code, you can release it under whatever license you choose. If you intend to contribute code to a project that whose code belongs elsewhere, you can choose to contribute or not based on your own prejudice. Other than that - your postings amount to little more than pissing in the wind. Craig
