On Saturday 18 August 2007 14:34:50 Joshua D. Drake wrote:
> The LGPL (without all the political stuff) is the fairest (imo) of all
> the FOSS licenses.
I might agree with that, but then again, I like my juice (and Kool Aid)
watered down too. ;-)
Cheers,
Chris
On Saturday 18 August 2007 13:47:32 Joshua D. Drake wrote:
> As a core member, if it were up to me, we would ditch GPL all together.
Fortunately IMO, we're not able to do so without a total re-write of the
software.
> I don't subscribe to the ideology present within it nor do I drink RMS
> bran
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
John Locke wrote:
> Hi,
>
> Joshua D. Drake wrote:
>> Hello,
> As a commercial company, I prefer releasing code under the GPL instead
> of the LGPL (or the Apache or the BSD licenses, etc), simply because it
> prevents competitors from taking my code
Hi,
Joshua D. Drake wrote:
> Hello,
>
> As a core member, if it were up to me, we would ditch GPL all together.
> I don't subscribe to the ideology present within it nor do I drink RMS
> brand kool aid.
I'm not a core member, but as a commercial open source company we've
thought about this issue
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
Hello,
As a core member, if it were up to me, we would ditch GPL all together.
I don't subscribe to the ideology present within it nor do I drink RMS
brand kool aid.
Does that mean that I am anti FOSS software? Hardly, in fact you would
be hard press
Stroller wrote:
> This discussion shouldn't be to complicated! Surely all the
> developers are familiar with the GPL. The GPL v3 is a contentious
> subject and has been discussed to death elsewhere; there is therefore
> no need for a flamewar on this list - surely a "now", "never!" or
> "m
