On 03.08.2010 09:31, Alexander Burger wrote:
On Tue, Aug 03, 2010 at 09:16:12AM +0200, Tomas Hlavaty wrote:
Agreed, but the new licence would encurage "taking away" as opposed to
"giving away".
I don't think so. If somebody takes it, modifies it, or does whatever
she likes, it does in no way have any influence on the existing
versions. So it does not "take away" anything. It just does not force
people to "add" their modifications.
if a picolisp bloody beginner is allowed to say something:

I personally do not even mind if someone takes some source, alters it and becomes filthy rich selling the results. But I would mind some kind of "embrace and extend" (like what happened to kerberos after win 2k), so that the market would later force you to support "industry standards", parts of which are patented and/or expensive.

Implementations can be free to alter by everyone, standards must not be free to alter by everyone.

So if you want some part/aspect of picolisp to be free and open forever, put these files unter LGPL and the rest under BSD.

UNSUBSCRIBE: mailto:picol...@software-lab.de?subject=unsubscribe

Reply via email to