Joe Greco [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: > Have you ever written code for something like a medical monitor? For > numerous reasons, you don't want that code available to the public. You > don't need some not-smart-enough hospital techie trying to make changes > to it, figuring out how to override the safeguards and then installing it > on your equipment, and then suddenly having liability issues. > Making the code available and allowing unqualified people to tinker with live medical equipment are two separate issues. You're getting confused now.
> > That doesn't mean that during the course of coding that project, that you > run across a nice high performance GPL'd line drawing algorithm, which is > perfect except that it doesn't draw antialiased lines, and while you would > have no problem writing and returning the antialiased line code back to > that project, you don't want your entire product becoming subject to the > GPL. > If you don't like the terms of the license chosen by the author(s) of another project then write your own code. If you want to take some GPLed code and don't want to release your project as open source, under the GPL, then write your own code. I don't see the problem. > > That's (close to) real world. In reality, we had a somewhat larger > example (plus some other miscellaneous examples) of something that would > have been nice to use, and which would have benefitted from returned > changes, had they not been licensed under GPL. We did, in fact, make > great use of X11, contributed various code fixes and other things back > to that project, though the driver I wrote for the propietary touchscreen > stuff was not sent back to MIT... what would the point have been? > If you haven't realised the point of open source software and software freedom by now then I can't really see the benefit in explaining it to you again. Perhaps you should apply for a job at Microsoft or Apple. > > > > At least the GPL would have > > protected the project from an even worse situation - wholesale code > > theft and lock-up. > > > Theft? Lock-up? No. That's what happens when someone actually breaks a > license. > Exactly. The BSD would allow this sort of thing to continue legally. The GPL would not, and purposefully prevents open source software from being closed. -- _/ _/ _/_/_/_/ _/ _/ _/_/_/ _/ _/ _/_/_/ _/_/ _/ _/ _/ _/_/ _/ K e v i n W a l s h _/ _/ _/ _/ _/ _/ _/ _/_/ [EMAIL PROTECTED] _/ _/ _/_/_/_/ _/ _/_/_/ _/ _/ _______________________________________________ Asterisk-Users mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://lists.digium.com/mailman/listinfo/asterisk-users To UNSUBSCRIBE or update options visit: http://lists.digium.com/mailman/listinfo/asterisk-users
