> But back to GNU vs. not-GNU. There is a GNU operating > system. Nobody > uses it and there are reasons for that. Instead of fixing > those > reasons, they want to tack their name onto the > distributions that people > do use because some portable applications from their set > are often > included. For reasons I've already covered, I'd > rather see distributions > minimize the GPL-encumbered code and use things from the > *bsd or > opensolaris projects instead - except for gcc which I > don't think has a > less restricted counterpart. Then the GNU project could > just go its own > way in the isolation the GPL demands while the rest of the > world > cooperates and interoperates at the component level. > > -- While ideally that would be nice, it won't happen :( Which license should be used then, if the above happens? There are other free licenses/open source licenses around, but which is the best one to use? As I understand, if one uses Linux Linux <===> GPL *BSD <==> BSD/GPL(for KDE/Gnome other DE) Solaris <===> CDDL A license that is often mentioned indirectly is the Beerware license http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Beerware Would that one be accepted as an appropriate license? People have to pay bills, support their families, gas up their vehicles, from where would the motivation come to continue giving up some work for no $, Which is the best way to continue and support your favorite OS and applications at the same time? There are many revisions to the GPL as of now, and I believe that one was posted on this list, how can cooperation be achieved and also protect the code as well? Regards, Antonio -- fedora-list mailing list fedora-list@xxxxxxxxxx To unsubscribe: https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-list
