Jeremy makes a persuasive argument for LGPL

[Roland]

At 09:07 PM 2/18/02 -0500, Anthony Taylor wrote:
> > Yes, I have read that by now. This is another point in favour of the BSD
> > license.
>
>No, that's a point in *Apples* favour.  The BSD license did not make
>Apple give anything back; they were not required to participate.  They

Ok, let me put it this way: some people say the BSD license is bad because 
no company will never give code back because they don't have to. The 
example from Apple just proves this extreme point of view wrong. Some 
companies will give back even if they don't have to.

>Granted, they also have a sense of money, too.

Exactly. They expect that improvements made by others to their kernel can 
be used in later products. At least the bug-fixes!


>Take, for instance, Microsoft's attempted hijacking of the Kerberos
>protocol.  MS almost took an accepted standard, and almost perverted it

Well, I think we are still better off as when M$ would have created their 
own protcol from scratch. They certainly have the money to do that. The way 
it is now, we just have to implement the extensions to be able to use 
M$-Kerberos. I don't see where the BSD license has brought any kind of 
disadvantage here.

Best regards, Roland