On 26-Oct-06, at 3:49 PM, പ്രവീണ്|Praveen wrote:
2006/10/26, Kenneth Gonsalves <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
you seem to be unaware that the gpl (any version) represents only a
small subset of licenses available.
NO. GPL is _the_ most popular FOSS License.
there are around 45 licenses available - gpl is one of them
See http://www.dwheeler.com/essays/gpl-compatible.html
<quote>
SourceForge.net reported on November 10, 2003 that the GPL accounted
for 71% of the 45,736 projects it hosted with OSI-approved open source
licenses (next most popular were the LGPL, 10%, and the BSD licenses,
7%).
</quote>
how many of these 45,000 projects are live? i am talking of live and
useful projects. Also dont forget that in sourceforge the default
choice for license is gpl and most people just click that without
knowing or caring what it is. But look around at the best and most
used applications - what is the percentage of gpl stuff?
In fact, as of now, the most
popular license appears to be the Mozilla Public License.
Can you provide a link to your claim that Mozilla Public license is
the most popular license. You can see Mozilla is not even coming in
the first three positions. May be you mis understood the information
from opensource.org
no link - danese cooper mentioned it during a talk, saying that
mozilla style licenses are most popular now a days - and by popular i
mean people who think long and hard about what license they are going
to use.
just went through the draft of v3 - it is a nightmare. If adopted by
anyone, it is going to cause endless confusion.
Can you specify which portions are not clear and why you think it
causes confution?
I cant - because most of it is obscure and would cause confusrion,
for example explain this:
The "System Libraries" of an executable work include every subunit
such that (a) the identical subunit is normally included as an
adjunct in the distribution of either a major essential component
(kernel, window system, and so on) of the specific operating system
(if any) on which the object code runs, or a compiler used to produce
the object code, or an object code interpreter used to run it, and
(b) the subunit (aside from possible incidental extensions) serves
only to enable use of the work with that system component or compiler
or interpreter, or to implement a widely used or standard interface
for which an implementation is available to the public in source code
form.
Compare the gpl to
creative commons licences and you will understand the difference.
Creative commons is meant for digital content and not software.
even i know that. I was talking about the importance of a license
being clear and simple. Which creative commons is and gpl v3 is not.
--
regards
Kenneth Gonsalves
Associate, NRC-FOSS
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
http://nrcfosshelpline.in/web/
--
http://mm.glug-bom.org/mailman/listinfo/linuxers
