On Thu, 11 Apr 2002, Doc wrote: > My original point, and the basis of my opposition to Stallman's > tactics [1], is that neither the GPL nor GNU software are the critical > factors in the success of Linux. GNU software was a critical > ***component to the development*** of Linux. If GNU had made Linux what > it is, this would likely be the SIGHurd list. A robust, fast-moving, > scalable & extensible kernel made Linux. A fanatic, intelligent, > skilled and loyal user/developer base, willing to write or just test > code for free under a variety of Free licenses, made Linux. > > It is arguable, by the numbers, that the Apache License and Apache > itself, are the key factors ofg Linux's worldwide success. A stable, > powerful, and Free suite of web-service tools literally bought Linux's > entry into the enterprise market. I've never heard anyone insist that > we should be Apache/Linux.
Point taken. My statement should have said one of the critical factors in Linux's origin. I concur that Apache is probably one of the critical factors in its success > Furthermore, the GNU project and the GPL had been around for years > when Linux was born, and noone outside of the sysadmin lists had ever > heard of it. AFAIK, in 1991, no software written outside the GNU > Project was licensed under the GPL. With the advent and growth of > Linux, Free Software and GNU became common terms, and more importantly, > the GPL became a _considered_ _option_ in licensing software uotside of > GNU, and even outside Unix. I can't prove that Linux made that happen. > I will claim that the trend is a damn close parallel, and that in any > case, GNU owes Linux as much as Linux owes GNU. Also a good point. The real reciprocity is that Linux proved in no uncertain terms that the GPL both protected the copyright holder and sped up development and debugging. Without that real-world success, there's no doubt that other companies and developers would have more easily dismissed the GPL. I still think that if the GPL hadn't existed (or something very similar) Linux might have been dead in the water. Without freely available dev tools to build on and expand with, compiling all those kernels and apps would have been a bit more expensive, and the growth of linux would have taken longer. -- Public key #7BBC68D9 at | Shane Williams http://pgp.mit.edu/ | Systems Administrator UT-GSLIS =----------------------------------+------------------------------- All syllogisms contain three lines | [EMAIL PROTECTED] Therefore this is not a syllogism | www.gslis.utexas.edu/~shanew _______________________________________________ Siglinux mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://www.utacm.org/mailman/listinfo/siglinux
