Anand Kumria <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>> b) Will non-GPL-compatible software disappear into obscurity as
>> developers find software that *can* be integrated, included and hacked
>> upon within strong GPL projects?
> No, there will always be authors (e.g. raster) who want to recognised
> by their work (the licence of Enlightenment is BSD-with-ad-clause).
> So non-GPL won't disappear. Other bigger exampels are Bind, OpenLDAP,
> OpenSSL, Apache and most MTAs (Mail Transer Agents) except Exim.
I think the issue here is not non-GPL licenses per se, but rather licenses
that that are NOT GPL-compatible. That is, code bearing those licenses
cannot be integrated with GPL code without explicit permission from the
author of the GPL code.
For example, BSD is a GPL-compatible license, while the old QPL wasn't.
--
Debian GNU/Linux 2.2 is out! ( http://www.debian.org/ )
Email: Herbert Xu ~{PmV>HI~} <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Home Page: http://gondor.apana.org.au/~herbert/
PGP Key: http://gondor.apana.org.au/~herbert/pubkey.txt
--
SLUG - Sydney Linux User Group Mailing List - http://slug.org.au/
More Info: http://slug.org.au/lists/listinfo/slug
