Jeremy makes a persuasive argument for LGPL
scf at farley.org
Mon Feb 18 13:58:23 CST 2002
On Mon, 18 Feb 2002 14:41, Roland wrote:
> At 12:32 PM 2/15/02 -0700, Brett Glass wrote:
> >Exactly the opposite is true. When the (L)GPL is stamped
> >onto code, every commercial programmer must reinvent
> >the wheel rather than using it. Many of these programmers
> >work for small businesses that are trying to compete
> Another good point from your side.
> And here comes another question from my side:
> The point in favor of the GPL as brought by Jeremy, is that the xGPL will
> encourage contributions. I have to agree with Jeremie: with the BSD
> license, companies will tend to keep things back. Look at Apples OS-X. It
> is based on BSD, but they probably NEVER will make their code public. So
> what benefit does the community have from it?
They have release Darwin as well as an NFS testing tool. FreeBSD did
benefit a lot from that testing tool.
> Jeremie pointed out, that he wants to give all code produced in his company
> back to the WINE-tree. Now if WINE is GPL he will have an excellent
> argument for his customers: sorry, we have to contribute all code back.
I believe he already stated that he currently requires that their code
be contributed back to WINE.
> If WINE is not GPLd, his customers will probably want to keep the code
> proprietary, in order to have a competitive advantage over others...
> What can you say about that Brett?
I still don't understand the problem for Jeremy from a commercial stand
point. His company is paid to develop code. Under either the BSD or
LGPL, he would have the same situation.
Besides, as the owner of a company, he can always decide not to develop
code for those potential customers who wish to keep the resulting code
> Maybe there is another kind of license that could adress both issues...but
> I doubt it...
scf at farley.org
More information about the wine-devel