Hisham Mardam Bey wrote: > On Thu, Aug 7, 2008 at 9:30 AM, Nick Hughart <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > >>> Some people don't want their code forked off and closed away and want >>> all contributions to come back. This is the difference. >>> >>> >> This sounds a lot like having your cake and eating it too heh. LGPL only >> stops the company from modifying the lib anyway, any other work they do goes >> towards their lib. What if they add a bunch of worthless code that only >> adds hooks to an external binary blob or something? Is that code any use >> then? I think this limitation is so easily worked around as to make it >> completely pointless. >> >>>> Also, by introducing an LGPL lib into the community to the point that >>>> our core BSD libs become dependent on it does hurt things. It's always >>>> been the assumption that our core libs will be BSD from the bottom up. >>>> E17 is also licensed BSD. >>>> >>>> >>> This is a decision that was made around 10 years ago, we're working on >>> changing that. >>> >>> >> Is there a reason to change it? Has the original decision led to problems? >> Is switching to the LGPL going to instantly solve our community issues or >> is it just going to cause more animosity between the developers? A divided >> community doesn't exactly help get corporate interest brewing either. Plus >> any company looking into the EFL now may just go elsewhere because they may >> perceive that the license will change and thus cause them plenty of issues >> in the long run. >> >>> >>>> If the lib was not core we didn't worry all >>>> that much about the license used, at least as a community. When it >>>> comes to the libs that we ship as our crowning achievements, having two >>>> licenses throughout is just going to drive companies insane. It >>>> complicates all the legalities involved and they then have to be extra >>>> careful not to touch any LGPL lib code. Also note how I said LGPL >>>> coming into the community and not LGPL in general. Generally any LGPL >>>> lib we depend on now is an indirect dep of another lib we depend on that >>>> is generally BSD or otherwise similarly licensed (best I can tell >>>> anyway). Some of the indirect deps like libC are not always GPL either >>>> as we are not (or should not) be dependent on a single implementation of >>>> this. After having looked into this more heavily I'm now even more >>>> concerned by having an LGPL as an immediate dep of Evas and Ecore, two >>>> of our lowest level libraries. >>>> >>>> >>> No one expects anything to happen over the course of a single night, >>> week, or month. Its going to take some time, and we're going to keep >>> at it until its done. >>> >>> >>> >> So you're assuming everyone will just give up and accept the LGPL? I highly >> doubt this will happen so have fun fighting. It's a choice based on ideals. >> Some of us are not worried about what a company does with our code as we >> feel like furthering the development of software in any way possible. >> Getting paid to code software tends to lead to more code generation and if >> they do decide to give back, that's great, but even if they don't they will >> have hopefully created a good product that consumers can use based on code >> that others can help improve. If they completely fork the code and modify >> it heavily then they've added enough value that it may not even be the same >> code anymore and possibly not even the same idea. Regardless of the fact >> that forking to these degree is no small undertaking. >> >> >> > > Ideals, true, our ideals point in the direction of the LGPL. > > This discussion is really not going anywhere. I'm not going to waste > time replying anymore. Our goals and intentions are clear. We're > working towards them and will accomplish what we set out to do. > > Those who choose to stagnate and bind themselves to the previous state > of the project may do so, we're proceeding forward by writing code and > making changes. > Glad to see that everyone is still under the illusion that the license is the problem when that has little to nothing to do with it. It has to do with things like this that cause the community to be unable to compromise and split off. Thank you for proving my point for me, made things much easier. Sounds a lot like Obama's campaign, making a lot of change just for the sake of changing.
------------------------------------------------------------------------- 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
