Jacob Meuser wrote:
On Mon, Sep 17, 2007 at 09:47:43AM +0200, Helge Hafting wrote:
Your problem seems to be with the BSD licence,
and the power to alter that licence lies in the BSD community.
I hope you can understand that this mentality is _exactly_ what has
some in the BSD community so upset.
First, note that I am not really a linux developer as my only
contributions to linux are testing.
But it really looks like bsd people are more unhappy with their
licence than linux people. You can ask linux developers to
keep the bsd licence - and the request is not unreasonable.
Nobody is forced to give back, so some people choose not
to. Some of these have a "GPL" agenda, some have
a commercial agenda.
I am sure some developers are willing to "give back" bsd code,
but you can't do anything about those who don't. You don't
want to have code "locked up" with GPL, these developers
don't want their code improvements "locked up" in proprietary products.
So - either you will have to accept the current situation, or
adjust the BSD licence to cope with this.
when I see the linux community start to take credit for works they
did not create and I see the linux community respond to warnings
Taking credit for the works of others is wrong of course,
no matter what licence is involved.
that people in the community are going overboard and jeopardizing
the linux community, which we do all benefit from, with a more or
less "whatever" attitude, it makes me sad. it would be like losing
a friend. I don't like losing friends, so I get vocal.
I don't understand why the linux community can't seem to say, "We
can accept BSD licensed code. There's no need to add the GPL to
it." and maybe even, "Although we strongly prefer the GPL,
respect for other licenses is every bit as important as respect
for the GPL."
Good points. But note that the linux community is divided on this,
as on many other issues. And there is nothing to do about
those who disagree.
I could be wrong, but I strongly believe that if the above was
truly accepted and believed by the community, the actions that
started and spread this whole debacle^Wdebate would not have
happened in the first place.
My impression is that the actions that started the
debate was an unauthorized (possibly illegal)
change that the linux community also rejected.
With that problem solved, the debate turned to
gpl/bsd licencing issues.
look, the GPL legally forces others to keep the same license.
the BSD community is asking the linux community do the same.
and when the linux community refuses, what do you expect the
recourse to be?
Clearly, there is the risk of less cooperation. Or some
kind of licencing scheme that makes sure that code with bsd
origin always can go back into bsd as long as it stays open.
That would solve the problem - if such a scheme is possible.
Helge Hafting
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
