If someone belives in free software, I'd prefer they'd just improve the existing code base than fork it, unless there is a _distinct_ difference in intent and plans for the future.
The GPL prohibits companies from using the software and improving/distributing it, unless they want to give away all of their changes. I don't see how that allows EVERYBODY to use the software. No, I don't realize how that'd be banning poor people from using the software. I just see it as hypocritical to believe in free software and yet want to fork something without evaluating it for what its worth and trying to change it for _everyone_. If you insist on having a fork for reasons that are beyone me (The name doesn't mean _that_ much) then at least dual license your changes to the source base. -Dan Papasian <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> On Tue, Feb 08, 2000 at 01:05:27AM -0300, Pablo Baena wrote: > Wow! Now you lost me. So if somebody takes your code, changes its name and > sell it, you have no problem at all, but if somebody else take it and > distributes it everywhere without cost, then you're mad? Don't you realize > that in that way you're banning poor people of using the software? > That's why the GPL exists, to allow EVERYBODY to use the software. > > Man, I'm so happy for changing FreeBSD for Linux. > Pablo.
