On May 10, 5:04 am, modius <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > On May 10, 8:12 am, Justin Carter <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > My thoughts on the GPLv3 are mixed, leaning towards not favourable. > > One the one hand it seems like a good idea to encourage more code to > > be contributed to the community. However, "Distribution" seems to be > > something as simple as copying a file from one project which was > > developed for client A and using it in a project for client B, meaning > > you are then obliged to make the whole source of both of your projects > > available? > > I believe your only "obligation" is to make your *change* available > under GPL -- after all, that is what you are distributing. The rest of > both projects, assuming they remain private in a single organisation, > would not have been distributed.
Is it possible to get clarification on this somehow? Everything that I read in regard to distributing source code always points back to the source code for binaries, in which case the entire source must be provided. I can't be certain that it is any different for non-binary distribution though because I can't find any examples. > > And therefore Dual Licensing just feels like a burden > > because you have to be careful with what you do with your source: code > > re-use flys out the window unless you are willing (and able) to pay. > > Well I'm happy to hear arguments of this nature backed up with real > world examples of where people are being burdened. Can you give > examples of where this would have been a problem had earlier versions > of FarCry been GPL? I need concrete case studies to process so that > we can tell how people are likely to be impacted. I can't give any examples where distribution would have affected me personally because all my work was for, and kept within, a single organisation :) However there is the initial burden of reading and understanding (LOL?) our rights and obligations under the GPLv3, determining if and how current and future projects will be impacted if FarCry 5 was used (or upgraded to from v4 in an existing system), knowing how to correctly offer source code that is licensed under GPLv3, etc. I think these things are seen as road blocks by some developers. Also, to guage impact, you might be able to survey the FarCry community to see exactly how they are using FarCry currently. I know it won't give an accurate representation on future developers when the community grows, but you could at least determine if the majority are using FarCry "in-house" (in which case the GPL might be fine) or in external projects across multiple clients (in which case the GPL might be fine if the source is released, or otherwise a commercial license could be purchased). I would probably leave any potential commercial pricing out of it for now, incase you scare anyone :) Hehe... > Most seem "worried" about the GPL, because it gives them a "bad > feeling". Heh, don't get me wrong I use to feel that way. It think it > stems mostly from a lack of understanding of how it all works, and > what we don't understand we don't want to deal with. This is entirely true :) Legal stuff scares the hell out of people, so much so that sometimes it's easier to look for alternatives. It would be a shame for that to happen here, so I think the best thing we can do is continue to discuss the GPL in the hopes that it will give some people some answers, even if it's not 100% legally bulletproof :P > Care is only required if you want to keep your code closed-source. > Presumably that is because there is a commercial benefit in keeping > the code that way. When I run through the scenarios of when and how > it impacts people -- its invariably because they are trying to protect > some commercial interest from the rest of the community. And like > I've said before, that's fine -- but perhaps they ought to pay for the > privilege and thereby better ensure the future of FarCry by funding > its developers. I think quite often the source code isn't offered up because it's extra work to package up your source and make it available to the world. Or you might not think your code is particularly useful or well written and you may not want others going through your dirty laundry. Or you may think it is a poential security risk to make your source available... Or any number of other silly or not so silly reasons! cheers, Justin --~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~ You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "farcry-dev" group. To post to this group, send email to [email protected] To unsubscribe from this group, send email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/farcry-dev?hl=en -~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---
