Matthew Saltzman <mjs@xxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > On Thu, 2008-06-19 at 12:59 -0300, Alexandre Oliva wrote: > > On Jun 18, 2008, Matthew Saltzman <mjs@xxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > > > > > Then can we at least agree that there are sometimes unfortunate > > > consequences to the GPL's failure to permit one to share a work > > > combining two pieces of *free* software because of relatively minor[1] > > > license incompatibilities? > > Yeah, it's unfortunate when this happens. In general, authors who use > > the GPL for its intended purpose (ensuring the 4 freedoms are > > respected for all users) won't object to the combination of their > > works with other works that respect users' freedoms, and will grant > > additional permissions for the combinations in spite of the license > > conflicts. > > Of course, not everyone does that, and some people who would like to > > create such combinations may even not realize that this possibility > > exists, or think it's not worth the effort. > Would not the world then be a better place if the GPL permitted such > combinations to start with? That would simplify this process enormously > and help spread free software. ... into all sorts of non-free combinations. The GPL is as it is for a purpose, else the BSD/MIT license (or just public domain) would be enough. > > So, yeah, it's unfortunate, but I don't think it's really such a big > > deal. Nearly all Free Software *is* available under the GPL and > > compatible licenses anyway. > Maybe all the free software *you* use... Most of what is out there, by all surveys I've seen. > PHP, for example, is not under GPL. When MySQL changed its free > distribution from LGPL to GPL, that almost put an end to the php-mysql > library. The end result was MySQL's free software exception clause, > which they added to the GPL to create their license. Fixed. See? > I work on a free software project (very widely known in my field) that > is primarily CPL. GPL compatibility is a problem for us. We also need > to interface to proprietary libraries. I have little hope that I can > get permission from all the contributors' employers to dual license. No simple answers there. In any case, GPL /allows/ you to do certain things, and you are getting this software because people feel confortable distributing under GPL. At least it is interoperable in itself. > Plenty of companies that would be willing to release free software are > leery of releasing it as GPL Why? > and of using GPL software. Now that is completely unwarranted. > Whether their > concerns are well founded or not, the compatibility issues are still > there. But they are way less than trying to combine stuff under the typical assortment of privative licenses in any case... have you looked in detail at that kind of mess? -- Dr. Horst H. von Brand User #22616 counter.li.org Departamento de Informatica Fono: +56 32 2654431 Universidad Tecnica Federico Santa Maria +56 32 2654239 Casilla 110-V, Valparaiso, Chile 2340000 Fax: +56 32 2797513 -- fedora-devel-list mailing list fedora-devel-list@xxxxxxxxxx https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-devel-list
