Re: GPL is free for forcing people to free code when they publish, not free as in free to do what you want, which is actually what free as in BSD, and real freedom ends at the tip of my nose
On Fri, Apr 13, 2007 at 08:25:43AM -0400, Umnada Tyrolla wrote: Why isn't there some zealot out there who recodes gpl stuff into bsd licensed code? That would be a service to developers, at least. Because preaching takes much less energy than sitting for long hours at a computer and figuring out why a piece of code is refusing to work. I myself coded some GPL software and released it, the biggest one is 25% of the Links browser which is included in the OpenBSD packages. It's not clear to me what's better, GPL or BSD. I don't care. Personally I always choose GPL for software projects and GFDL for hardware projects. Due to law, hardware is de facto always released under a BSD style licence. I didn't have any problem with the fact that my hardware is under BSD. Neither had I problem with my software being released under GPL. CL
Re: GPL is free for forcing people to free code when they publish, not free as in free to do what you want, which is actually what free as in BSD, and real freedom ends at the tip of my nose
Why isn't there some zealot out there who recodes gpl stuff into bsd licensed code? That would be a service to developers, at least. -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Darrin Chandler Sent: Wednesday, April 11, 2007 4:53 PM To: chefren Cc: misc Subject: Re: GPL is free for forcing people to free code when they publish, not free as in free to do what you want, which is actually what free as in BSD, and real freedom ends at the tip of my nose On Wed, Apr 11, 2007 at 10:25:03PM +0200, chefren wrote: On 4/11/07 5:45 PM, Darrin Chandler wrote: Now that the subject is accurate, it's more obvious than ever that this discussion doesn't belong here. Not only is it not relevant, but it's been discussed to death many times, in many places. Clearly not to death and people here are seriously interested in pro and contra arguments. Just because you're still flogging a horse doesn't mean it's not dead. BSD v. GPL is easy to understand: If you want to give your code away for whatever purpose, use BSD. If you want to enforce your view of correct on anyone using your code, use GPL. -- Darrin Chandler| Phoenix BSD User Group | MetaBUG [EMAIL PROTECTED] | http://phxbug.org/ | http://metabug.org/ http://www.stilyagin.com/ | Daemons in the Desert | Global BUG Federation
Re: GPL is free for forcing people to free code when they publish, not free as in free to do what you want, which is actually what free as in BSD, and real freedom ends at the tip of my nose
This is gradually being done. But coding replacements for all that GPL code takes time (and talent). I'm drinking milk, and one day I'll be able to code well enough to add my poor skills to the talent pool doing just that. Until that day, I do what I can. -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Behalf Of Umnada Tyrolla Sent: Friday, April 13, 2007 8:26 AM To: 'Darrin Chandler'; [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: Re: GPL is free for forcing people to free code when they publish, not free as in free to do what you want, which is actually what free as in BSD, and real freedom ends at the tip of my nose Why isn't there some zealot out there who recodes gpl stuff into bsd licensed code? That would be a service to developers, at least. -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Darrin Chandler Sent: Wednesday, April 11, 2007 4:53 PM To: chefren Cc: misc Subject: Re: GPL is free for forcing people to free code when they publish, not free as in free to do what you want, which is actually what free as in BSD, and real freedom ends at the tip of my nose On Wed, Apr 11, 2007 at 10:25:03PM +0200, chefren wrote: On 4/11/07 5:45 PM, Darrin Chandler wrote: Now that the subject is accurate, it's more obvious than ever that this discussion doesn't belong here. Not only is it not relevant, but it's been discussed to death many times, in many places. Clearly not to death and people here are seriously interested in pro and contra arguments. Just because you're still flogging a horse doesn't mean it's not dead. BSD v. GPL is easy to understand: If you want to give your code away for whatever purpose, use BSD. If you want to enforce your view of correct on anyone using your code, use GPL. -- Darrin Chandler| Phoenix BSD User Group | MetaBUG [EMAIL PROTECTED] | http://phxbug.org/ | http://metabug.org/ http://www.stilyagin.com/ | Daemons in the Desert | Global BUG Federation __ NOD32 2187 (20070413) Information __ This message was checked by NOD32 antivirus system. http://www.eset.com
Re: GPL is free for forcing people to free code when they publish, not free as in free to do what you want, which is actually what free as in BSD, and real freedom ends at the tip of my nose
Jack J. Woehr wrote: On Apr 11, 2007, at 2:25 PM, chefren wrote: Clearly not to death and people here are seriously interested in pro and contra arguments. Hey, if you young folks still have all that typing power in your fingers, please bang on the code for BSD some more! Or finish a few GPL projects. Or BSD projects. Or proactively audit some code. Or or or... There is lots of work that can be done to make the world better. Encouraging the various choirs to preach at each other is unlikely to change any minds, nor is it going to make the world better. Nick.
Re: GPL is free for forcing people to free code when they publish, not free as in free to do what you want, which is actually what free as in BSD, and real freedom ends at the tip of my nose
[correct the subject] ;) Qua, 2007-04-11 C s 14:26 +0100, Jeroen Massar escreveu: [set the topic to make it nice and clear, this has nothing to do with bcw(4) for a long time now, actually the whole thread avoided it] Rui Miguel Silva Seabra wrote: Seg, 2007-04-09 C s 18:29 +0100, Jeroen Massar escreveu: GPL is good though if you want to force people to give back the code to you so that you can use it in your own dual-licensed projects. This shows a fundamental lack of understanding of the way both the GPL and generic copyright work. * Nobody is forced to publish derivative works (as long as they keep them inside doors, eg. internal usage in a company) * Dual licensing in the way you suggest would be a copyright violation. Did you actually read what I wrote, as the above two points where in my text, but you deleted that from your reply. You might want to read the snipped text too :) I actually made a difference between the original copyright owner (who is allowed to do anything they like with the code) and somebody adding their stuff, who can't relicense it. As for the first 'point' you are trying to make, also covered in my text... What you also said is actually fully irrelevant, since I'm correcting one phrase which has TWO incorrect things, one of them a copyright violation. You can't dual-license other people's GPL'ed contributions. PS: Please realize that some people want a different kind of freedom than that other people want, respect that: take your pick, go GPL or BSD, but don't try to force your religion on other people. You might end up getting Jehova's witnesses on your neck ;) Please realize that I didn't raise that issue, *you* did. I merely focused on two quite simple technical details which you failed to understand: one of the GPL and another of copyright law. Rui -- + No matter how much you do, you never do enough -- unknown + Whatever you do will be insignificant, | but it is very important that you do it -- Gandhi + So let's do it...? [demime 1.01d removed an attachment of type application/pgp-signature which had a name of signature.asc]
Re: GPL is free for forcing people to free code when they publish, not free as in free to do what you want, which is actually what free as in BSD, and real freedom ends at the tip of my nose
Rui Miguel Silva Seabra wrote: [correct the subject] ;) Qua, 2007-04-11 C s 14:26 +0100, Jeroen Massar escreveu: [set the topic to make it nice and clear, this has nothing to do with bcw(4) for a long time now, actually the whole thread avoided it] Rui Miguel Silva Seabra wrote: Seg, 2007-04-09 C s 18:29 +0100, Jeroen Massar escreveu: GPL is good though if you want to force people to give back the code to you so that you can use it in your own dual-licensed projects. This shows a fundamental lack of understanding of the way both the GPL and generic copyright work. * Nobody is forced to publish derivative works (as long as they keep them inside doors, eg. internal usage in a company) * Dual licensing in the way you suggest would be a copyright violation. Did you actually read what I wrote, as the above two points where in my text, but you deleted that from your reply. You might want to read the snipped text too :) I actually made a difference between the original copyright owner (who is allowed to do anything they like with the code) and somebody adding their stuff, who can't relicense it. As for the first 'point' you are trying to make, also covered in my text... What you also said is actually fully irrelevant, since I'm correcting one phrase which has TWO incorrect things, one of them a copyright violation. You can't dual-license other people's GPL'ed contributions. Again, re-read what I wrote. Don't try to mingle my words as I never wrote that, it was in one sentence yes, but the rest of the sentences told a completely different story. Good that I PGP sign my messages so that it is clear that I didn't write what you think I wrote by stripping out the portions that also matter and that without those portions the message is not mine. Greets, Jeroen [demime 1.01d removed an attachment of type application/pgp-signature which had a name of signature.asc]
Re: GPL is free for forcing people to free code when they publish, not free as in free to do what you want, which is actually what free as in BSD, and real freedom ends at the tip of my nose
Now that the subject is accurate, it's more obvious than ever that this discussion doesn't belong here. Not only is it not relevant, but it's been discussed to death many times, in many places. -- Darrin Chandler| Phoenix BSD User Group | MetaBUG [EMAIL PROTECTED] | http://phxbug.org/ | http://metabug.org/ http://www.stilyagin.com/ | Daemons in the Desert | Global BUG Federation
Re: GPL is free for forcing people to free code when they publish, not free as in free to do what you want, which is actually what free as in BSD, and real freedom ends at the tip of my nose
On 4/11/07 5:45 PM, Darrin Chandler wrote: Now that the subject is accurate, it's more obvious than ever that this discussion doesn't belong here. Not only is it not relevant, but it's been discussed to death many times, in many places. Clearly not to death and people here are seriously interested in pro and contra arguments. +++chefren p.s. GPLvX is BSD with DRM, GPLvX people try to rule after giving it away, new GPL versions are needed because the idea behind it is flawed, GPLvX people believe it can be fixed, BSD people know it's technically beyond repair since the first version.
Re: GPL is free for forcing people to free code when they publish, not free as in free to do what you want, which is actually what free as in BSD, and real freedom ends at the tip of my nose
On Wed, Apr 11, 2007 at 10:25:03PM +0200, chefren wrote: On 4/11/07 5:45 PM, Darrin Chandler wrote: Now that the subject is accurate, it's more obvious than ever that this discussion doesn't belong here. Not only is it not relevant, but it's been discussed to death many times, in many places. Clearly not to death and people here are seriously interested in pro and contra arguments. Just because you're still flogging a horse doesn't mean it's not dead. BSD v. GPL is easy to understand: If you want to give your code away for whatever purpose, use BSD. If you want to enforce your view of correct on anyone using your code, use GPL. -- Darrin Chandler| Phoenix BSD User Group | MetaBUG [EMAIL PROTECTED] | http://phxbug.org/ | http://metabug.org/ http://www.stilyagin.com/ | Daemons in the Desert | Global BUG Federation
Re: GPL is free for forcing people to free code when they publish, not free as in free to do what you want, which is actually what free as in BSD, and real freedom ends at the tip of my nose
On Apr 11, 2007, at 2:25 PM, chefren wrote: Clearly not to death and people here are seriously interested in pro and contra arguments. Hey, if you young folks still have all that typing power in your fingers, please bang on the code for BSD some more! -- Jack J. Woehr Director of Development Absolute Performance, Inc. [EMAIL PROTECTED] 303-443-7000 ext. 527
Re: GPL is free for forcing people to free code when they publish, not free as in free to do what you want, which is actually what free as in BSD, and real freedom ends at the tip of my nose
chefren wrote: Clearly not to death and people here are seriously interested in pro and contra arguments. People are interested in discussing a lot things but that doesn't mean those discussions belong on [EMAIL PROTECTED] --- Lars Hansson
