El Thu, 25 Nov 2010 12:39:17 -0800 Alex Combas <blenderw...@gmail.com> escribió: > On Thu, Nov 25, 2010 at 8:55 AM, Campbell Barton > <ideasma...@gmail.com> wrote: > > Hi, All things considered I'm apathetic towards LGPL switch. > > > > Its still quite restrictive, and I'm not aware of any commercial > > extensions for blender so far, even though its possible to write > > them without changing to LGPL. > > > > > > May I point out that existing blender developers are not pushing for > > this, one might consider if they had trouble feeding their families > > that this would be of interest to them. > > > > So with a less restrictive license I would write a commercial plugin > > for blender, sit back and earn an income, right? > > > > The thing is, I don't want to make money this way, even if I could > > earn more then GPL dev. Its just not a fun way to do development, so > > it would make me less interested to be a blender developer if this > > is the kind of people we have to interact with on the mailing list, > > irc, etc. > > > > I think we can better focus on services and support model for > > income, it may earn less short term but we will have more satisfied > > users. > > > Well for a thread which has been apparently dropped it certainly seems > to be an interesting an active topic. > > And I must say that when the thread started I was rather unhappy with > the general tone of the responses but as things have progressed I > think the responses have gotten a lot better even though they are > still generally anti-LGPL. > > So I would like to reply to this latest batch of responses, but I'm > not trying to reopen the debate, I consider the debate to be closed. > > @Knapp. Thomas Prashant Campbell > > I completely negative feeling towards the Windows system, that was my > experience as well, and it has also been my experience since switching > to linux years ago that I have felt better about my system not running > on stolen software. > > But when you say this: > > "Letting people take that community effort and use it for their own > personal benefit without giving back to that same community is a bit > wrong IMOHO" > > Artists take it and use it and generally do not give back. > Writers take it and use it and generally do not give it back. > Web users take it and use it and generally do not give back. > Office users take it and use it and generally do not give back. > > You are making one exception, programmers, they must not use it unless > they give back 100%. > > But what I am saying is that there is likely a group of programmers > who will simply not _ever_ use it if they are forced to play by those > rules. > > Now ask yourself, why do we release free software for closed > environments like Windows, and Macs? > > Is it not because although we do not agree with those closed > environments we know that a good way to get people to switch to an > open model is to allow them use it and test it and slowly make the > change to a free platform? > > What I am saying is that there would be two similar benefits to closed > extensions. > > First, programmers who right now would not consider developing an > extension for blender because of the GPL might consider it since they > might view it as an opportunity to make money. Don't be upset with > that view, artists look at Blender with just as greedy eyes, and > similarly office users look at Libreoffice (openoffice) the same way, > it is an opportunity for them to make or save money. There is nothing > wrong with a programmer who wants to make/save money. > > Second, if these programmers do develop an extension for Blender they > may become invested in Blenders future, if Blender becomes more > popular then they have more opportunity to sell their extension, so > they suddenly want Blender to become more popular. They see that > Blender has a bug, so they contribute some code to Blender to fix it. > Remember, Blender itself will always be open source, any change to > Blender itself must be made public if any of the code is distributed. > > This is what has happened with Linux, do you think IBM really cares > about open source? I don't. I think they care about money. They make > money with Linux and so they are invested in Linux's future, they want > Linux to be as good as it possibly could be because then they make > more money so they have been actively contributing open source code to > Linux for years, and they see their profits go up. > > I doubt there is an IBM out there for Blender just waiting to > contribute, but what if there is a single programmer and one or two of > his friends who want to make a small company and they are interested > in the 3D modeling/animation/design industry. Right now they would > look at Blender and say wow wouldn't that be great, too bad it is GPL, > and so then they would go and start working on a 3DMax extension, or a > Maya extension. > > It is no problem for them, they can just pick another platform, it is > a problem for us because they didn't pick ours. > > The existing Blender developers (see Campbells most recent email) have > said that they would not want to write closed extensions anyway so > people who are worried that allowing closed extensions would somehow > lessen Blender developers are wrong, it would only increase Blender > developers by bringing new people into the market and making them > invested in Blenders future. > > I have nothing against a services and support model, in fact that is > probably something I will try to do eventually. > > But I want to see Blender become as good as it can be, I just think > this would be one way that would help Blender in the long run. > > The better Linux becomes the more people see it as a way to make/save > money (web developers, artists, writers) and the same with > programmers, we shouldn't shut them out. > _______________________________________________ > Bf-committers mailing list > Bf-committers@blender.org > http://lists.blender.org/mailman/listinfo/bf-committers
Blender is a tool for artists, not programmers. _______________________________________________ Bf-committers mailing list Bf-committers@blender.org http://lists.blender.org/mailman/listinfo/bf-committers