On Sun, Aug 3, 2008 at 2:15 PM, dan sinclair <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > On 3-Aug-08, at 1:04 PM, Gustavo Sverzut Barbieri wrote: > >> On Sun, Aug 3, 2008 at 1:56 PM, dan sinclair <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> >> wrote: >>> >>> On 3-Aug-08, at 12:43 PM, Gustavo Sverzut Barbieri wrote: >>>> >>>> On Sun, Aug 3, 2008 at 7:31 AM, Andreas Volz <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> >>>> wrote: >>>>> >>>>> It seems the license question is still very much discussed. Until now I >>>>> didn't say much about it. But now I like to add my 2 cents to that >>>>> topic. >>>>> >>>>> At work we develop software for embedded devices. In most cases is the >>>>> result a commercial closed-source product. >>>>> >>>>> For sure we used open source software in the past (not based on EFL >>>>> until now!). So GPL is no option. The LGPL would be an option. But >>>>> in most cases it's not an option as good as BSD (better say MIT). The >>>>> reason is that in most cases it's needed to modify the library itself. >>>>> For example if there's a Win32 and a Linux port, but no WinCE port. For >>>>> sure one could contribute the changes back to the open source project. >>>>> But in most cases this doesn't happen because of time or interest. >>>> >>>> This is exactly what companies that contribute back, like ProFUSION >>>> and others, dislike. We do contribute back and we expect that others >>>> do that, we want others to play fair. >>>> >>> >>> This is also what other companies that contribute to the EFL like. They >>> want >>> to be able to hold some stuff back while giving other stuff back to the >>> community. >> >> Yes, and in this case why don't they create another library? If they >> need to modify the library we all use, then why not give it back? >> Those that are complaining find that wrong and unfair. > > Maybe the work they're doing isn't useful for the rest of the community.
that's up to the community to decide. > Maybe they had to sign an NDA to work with a specific chipset and can't give > back. I don't care. > Maybe they implement something that is central to their business and > don't want to give away the keys to the kingdom but are willing to help with > other parts of the lib in the public. Everything can be considered the central business, even doing packages and assembling the pieces together (see ubuntu). And I don't care, that's the company problem, not the community problem. -- Gustavo Sverzut Barbieri http://profusion.mobi embedded systems -------------------------------------- MSN: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Skype: gsbarbieri Mobile: +55 (19) 9225-2202 ------------------------------------------------------------------------- This SF.Net email is sponsored by the Moblin Your Move Developer's challenge Build the coolest Linux based applications with Moblin SDK & win great prizes Grand prize is a trip for two to an Open Source event anywhere in the world http://moblin-contest.org/redirect.php?banner_id=100&url=/ _______________________________________________ enlightenment-devel mailing list enlightenment-devel@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/enlightenment-devel
