On Mon, Sep 17, 2007 at 03:38:45PM +0200, Adrian Bunk wrote: | It's not about lazyness of BSD developers, many people who consider the= =20 | BSD licence more free than the GPL argue that the advantage of the BSD=20 | licence is that it does not require you to give back. |=20 | Something is wrong if your licence text clearly states that you do not=20 | require getting anything back but you then argue on moral grounds that | something has to be given back. Something is wrong if your licence text clearly states that you MUST give back, but then you don't return the favour on grounds that "hey, they don't require it, so we don't have to". It may be perfectly legal, but it's "interesting" to say the least. No, you do not have to give back. But weren't you open source / free software developers ? Why did you pick the GPL ? Because you didn't want someone to run of with your code ? You wanted code to be given back ? Why not do it yourself ? By not giving back you're giving a strange signal. Paul 'WEiRD' de Weerd PS: Yes, I know .. but your "giving back" attaches new strings that weren't there in the first place. --=20+++++++++++>-]<.>++[<------------>-]<+.--------------.[-] http://www.weirdnet.nl/ =20
| Parag Warudkar | BUG: soft lockup - CPU#1 stuck for 15s! [swapper:0] |
| Tarkan Erimer | Re: Dual-Licensing Linux Kernel with GPL V2 and GPL V3 |
| Greg Kroah-Hartman | [PATCH 010/196] Chinese: add translation of Codingstyle |
| Andrew Morton | -mm merge plans for 2.6.23 |
git: | |
| Gerrit Renker | [PATCH 24/37] dccp: Processing Confirm options |
| David Miller | Re: [PATCH] pkt_sched: Destroy gen estimators under rtnl_lock(). |
| Alexey Dobriyan | Re: [GIT]: Networking |
| david | Re: iptables very slow after commit 784544739a25c30637397ace5489eeb6e15d7d49 |
