> Some of the arguments from the "other side" found in that > thread make sense. We are possibly a bit too aggressive > when we try to force people to comply with GPL > on other projects too, not only on bbox.
Good quality alternatives are a good thing. If Rob starts his Toybox project again, more power to him. If users - whether they are individuals or companies - can choose between two similar implementations of the same stuff, everyone benefits. The unfortunate reality is that most companies *really don't want* to release their source code. They will either refuse to have anything to do with copylefted software, or infringe the copyleft more or less blatantly. The "return something to the community" idea just does not work with them. So, GPL inforcement is a good thing, but as time goes by, companies will turn away more and more from copylefted software, and use more and more open source, non copylefted software. I am afraid that the uncompromising, unforgiving nature of the GPL will turn against it in the future, and harm more than promote widespread distribution of GPL'ed software - something that GPL zealots generally refuse to see. -- Laurent _______________________________________________ busybox mailing list [email protected] http://lists.busybox.net/mailman/listinfo/busybox
