Andrew Lentvorski wrote:
John H. Robinson, IV wrote:
Howso? I can see problems where you want to *change* the license, or if
you want to appropriate the code in your own, prorietary (read: non open
and free) project.
Short of those two situations, what problems have you experienced?
Computational geometry subsystems are a good example. There are quite a
few computational geometry subsystems available--all under various
licenses which restrict redistrbution.
[snip of hassles of dealing with multiple licenses]
So, the released library doesn't improve because I have no incentive to
do so.
Incentive, maybe not. Isn't need motivation enough. Or do you need some
kind of "Attaboy!"?
My library is sufficiently underfeatured that it is not worth
releasing. The world at large loses out.
I wonder what the world of FOSS would be like today if everyone from
Stallman and Torvalds on down thought like that.
* * *
It sounds not like the licenses are as much of a problem as that your
needs fall into a very niche category in which few are interested or
have have similar needs. Other than those who might very protective of
their work. How very ironic that FOSS software might stand more in your
way than the proprietary kind.
You've already developed code which works to some degree. Then release
it under the license of your choice. That /you/ don't think it's worth
releasing is irrelevant; the measure of its worth after its release will
be determined by the degree of its acceptance by the "World at large".
In return for your generosity, you might get that code returned to you
with the features you want and more, as added by the FOSS community. If
not, well, then you're no worse off than before.
GPL is nice when there is an active critical mass, but not a huge
number. BSD is nice for the very small niche stuff which tends to
languish years between uses and the very large stuff where getting
everyone to use it is more important than preventing change(the TCP/IP
stack, for example).
That's my experience, YMMV.
-a
I still don't see the difference between abandoned GPL code and
maintained GPL code in your context. Unless you're merely wanting
someone else to do the heavy lifting.
So what you really want is completely unencumbered feature-full code
offered to you by others - with no obligations on your part, except to
profit? Hey, don't we all.
Why not just buy what you need, negotiate a redistribution or run-time
license, and be done with it?
--
Best Regards,
~DJA.
--
[email protected]
http://www.kernel-panic.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/kplug-list
