On 11/8/2015 2:57 AM, Shirley Márquez Dúlcey wrote:
I think your interpretation of the TiVo situation is philosophically
incorrect, even though there are no factual errors.
Back in 2005, Apple convinced LLVM's authors to relicense under the GPL
and worked up the patch to merge LLVM into GCC. At the last minute the
GCC folks told Apple and LLVM to go away. GCC didn't want it. GCC didn't
like the modular design and there was probably a lot of NIH syndrome.
https://www.phoronix.com/scan.php?page=news_item&px=MTU4MzE
Now RMS bemoans how LLVM isn't free as in FSF software.
https://www.phoronix.com/scan.php?page=news_item&px=RMS-Emacs-Gud-LLVM
That's gratitude for you.
RMS and GNU have a history of poor treatment of GNU contributors and
would-be contributors. This has alienated users and would-be users of
free as in FSF software. It's not a misinterpretation. It's a fact.
Now that cloud computing and software as a service are being a normal
thing rather than an exception, the interesting question going forward
is whether we will see more adoption of the GNU Affero license. For
I figure not much. The Affero v3 license is even more hostile towards
commercial products than the GPLv3.
--
Rich P.
_______________________________________________
Discuss mailing list
Discuss@blu.org
http://lists.blu.org/mailman/listinfo/discuss
