bcw(4) is gone

classic Classic list List threaded Threaded
109 messages Options
1 ... 3456
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: GPL is free for forcing people to free code when they publish, not free as in free to do what you want, which is actually what free as in BSD, and real freedom ends at the tip of my nose

StrongBad
On Apr 11, 2007, at 2:25 PM, chefren wrote:

> Clearly not to death and people here are seriously interested in  
> pro and contra arguments.

Hey, if you young folks still have all that typing power in your  
fingers, please bang on the
code for BSD some more!

--
Jack J. Woehr
Director of Development
Absolute Performance, Inc.
[hidden email]
303-443-7000 ext. 527

Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: bcw(4) is gone

Shawn K. Quinn
In reply to this post by fuzzyping
On Mon, 2007-04-09 at 22:34 -0400, Jason Dixon wrote:
> GPL advocates claim their license prevents commercial entities from  
> stealing their freedom.  These are the same people who have no  
> problem giving up their freedoms (in the form of NDA's, closed-source
> kernel modules, etc) to the companies they're trying to fight.

True free software movement supporters will not sign an agreement not to
help their neighbor such as an NDA. Some in the open source movement
have no trouble accepting a binary only driver, or specifications under
NDA, or what have you, for convenience. That's what open source is
about: convenience, not freedom for its own sake. This is exactly why it
is important to make a distinction between the free software movement
and the open source movement and not lump the two together.

--
Shawn K. Quinn <[hidden email]>

Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: bcw(4) is gone

Todd Alan Smith-3
On 4/11/07, Shawn K. Quinn <[hidden email]> wrote:

> On Mon, 2007-04-09 at 22:34 -0400, Jason Dixon wrote:
> > GPL advocates claim their license prevents commercial entities from
> > stealing their freedom.  These are the same people who have no
> > problem giving up their freedoms (in the form of NDA's, closed-source
> > kernel modules, etc) to the companies they're trying to fight.
>
> True free software movement supporters will not sign an agreement not to
> help their neighbor such as an NDA. Some in the open source movement
> have no trouble accepting a binary only driver, or specifications under
> NDA, or what have you, for convenience. That's what open source is
> about: convenience, not freedom for its own sake. This is exactly why it
> is important to make a distinction between the free software movement
> and the open source movement and not lump the two together.

Exactly. And it's a distinction that must be made again and again and again.

Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: GPL is free for forcing people to free code when they publish, not free as in free to do what you want, which is actually what free as in BSD, and real freedom ends at the tip of my nose

Lars Hansson
In reply to this post by chefren
chefren wrote:
> Clearly not to death and people here are seriously interested in pro and
> contra arguments.

People are interested in discussing a lot things but that doesn't mean
those discussions belong on misc@.

---
Lars Hansson

Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: GPL is free for forcing people to free code when they publish, not free as in free to do what you want, which is actually what free as in BSD, and real freedom ends at the tip of my nose

Nick Holland
In reply to this post by StrongBad
Jack J. Woehr wrote:
> On Apr 11, 2007, at 2:25 PM, chefren wrote:
>
>> Clearly not to death and people here are seriously interested in  
>> pro and contra arguments.
>
> Hey, if you young folks still have all that typing power in your  
> fingers, please bang on the
> code for BSD some more!
>

Or "finish" a few GPL projects.  Or BSD projects.  Or proactively
audit some code.  Or or or...

There is lots of work that can be done to make the world better.
Encouraging the various choirs to preach at each other is
unlikely to change any minds, nor is it going to make the world
better.

Nick.

Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: bcw(4) is gone

Open Phugu
In reply to this post by Mike Erdely
On 4/11/07, Mike Erdely <[hidden email]> wrote:

> On Wed, Apr 11, 2007 at 08:20:51PM +0200, Timo Schoeler wrote:
> > On Wed, 11 Apr 2007 20:08:44 +0200 Marc Balmer wrote:
> > > > [X] -- communism isn't as bad as the GPL ;)
> > > [X] marco is a communist
> > no; if so, he's as good as communist as George W. Bush as president.
>
> WTF!  What the hell does GPL, communism or GWB have to do with OpenBSD?
> Let this thread die.
>
> -ME
/me agrees. This is a list about OpenBSD. Discussion about the GPL
*may* have its
place, but *please* don't interject politics into the discussion.
I dislike the GPL, but calling it communism is useless.

Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: GPL is free for forcing people to free code when they publish, not free as in free to do what you want, which is actually what free as in BSD, and real freedom ends at the tip of my nose

Umnada Tyrolla
In reply to this post by Darrin Chandler
Why isn't there some zealot out there who recodes gpl stuff into
bsd licensed code? That would be a service to developers, at least.

> -----Original Message-----
> From: [hidden email] [mailto:[hidden email]]
> On Behalf Of Darrin Chandler
> Sent: Wednesday, April 11, 2007 4:53 PM
> To: chefren
> Cc: misc
> Subject: Re: GPL is free for forcing people to free code when
> they publish, not free as in free to do what you want, which
> is actually what free as in BSD, and real freedom ends at the
> tip of my nose
>
> On Wed, Apr 11, 2007 at 10:25:03PM +0200, chefren wrote:
> > On 4/11/07 5:45 PM, Darrin Chandler wrote:
> > >Now that the subject is accurate, it's more obvious than
> ever that this
> > >discussion doesn't belong here. Not only is it not
> relevant, but it's
> > >been discussed to death many times, in many places.
> >
> > Clearly not to death and people here are seriously
> interested in pro
> > and contra arguments.
>
> Just because you're still flogging a horse doesn't mean it's not dead.
>
> BSD v. GPL is easy to understand:
>
> If you want to give your code away for whatever purpose, use BSD.
>
> If you want to enforce your view of "correct" on anyone using
> your code,
> use GPL.
>
> --
> Darrin Chandler            |  Phoenix BSD User Group  |  MetaBUG
> [hidden email]   |  http://phxbug.org/      |  
> http://metabug.org/
> http://www.stilyagin.com/  |  Daemons in the Desert   |  
> Global BUG Federation

Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: GPL is free for forcing people to free code when they publish, not free as in free to do what you want, which is actually what free as in BSD, and real freedom ends at the tip of my nose

Stuart VanZee
This is gradually being done.  But coding replacements for all that GPL
code takes time (and talent).  I'm drinking milk, and one day I'll be
able to code well enough to add my poor skills to the talent pool doing
just that.  Until that day, I do what I can.

> -----Original Message-----
> From: [hidden email] [mailto:[hidden email]]On Behalf Of
> Umnada Tyrolla
> Sent: Friday, April 13, 2007 8:26 AM
> To: 'Darrin Chandler'; [hidden email]
> Subject: Re: GPL is free for forcing people to free code when they
> publish, not free as in free to do what you want, which is actually what
> free as in BSD, and real freedom ends at the tip of my nose
>
>
> Why isn't there some zealot out there who recodes gpl stuff into
> bsd licensed code? That would be a service to developers, at least.
>
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: [hidden email] [mailto:[hidden email]]
> > On Behalf Of Darrin Chandler
> > Sent: Wednesday, April 11, 2007 4:53 PM
> > To: chefren
> > Cc: misc
> > Subject: Re: GPL is free for forcing people to free code when
> > they publish, not free as in free to do what you want, which
> > is actually what free as in BSD, and real freedom ends at the
> > tip of my nose
> >
> > On Wed, Apr 11, 2007 at 10:25:03PM +0200, chefren wrote:
> > > On 4/11/07 5:45 PM, Darrin Chandler wrote:
> > > >Now that the subject is accurate, it's more obvious than
> > ever that this
> > > >discussion doesn't belong here. Not only is it not
> > relevant, but it's
> > > >been discussed to death many times, in many places.
> > >
> > > Clearly not to death and people here are seriously
> > interested in pro
> > > and contra arguments.
> >
> > Just because you're still flogging a horse doesn't mean it's not dead.
> >
> > BSD v. GPL is easy to understand:
> >
> > If you want to give your code away for whatever purpose, use BSD.
> >
> > If you want to enforce your view of "correct" on anyone using
> > your code,
> > use GPL.
> >
> > --
> > Darrin Chandler            |  Phoenix BSD User Group  |  MetaBUG
> > [hidden email]   |  http://phxbug.org/      |  
> > http://metabug.org/
> > http://www.stilyagin.com/  |  Daemons in the Desert   |  
> > Global BUG Federation
>
>
> __________ NOD32 2187 (20070413) Information __________
>
> This message was checked by NOD32 antivirus system.
> http://www.eset.com

Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: GPL is free for forcing people to free code when they publish, not free as in free to do what you want, which is actually what free as in BSD, and real freedom ends at the tip of my nose

Karel Kulhavy
In reply to this post by Umnada Tyrolla
On Fri, Apr 13, 2007 at 08:25:43AM -0400, Umnada Tyrolla wrote:
> Why isn't there some zealot out there who recodes gpl stuff into
> bsd licensed code? That would be a service to developers, at least.

Because preaching takes much less energy than sitting for long hours at a
computer and figuring out why a piece of code is refusing to work.

I myself coded some GPL software and released it, the biggest one is 25% of the
Links browser which is included in the OpenBSD packages. It's not clear to me
what's better, GPL or BSD. I don't care. Personally I always choose GPL for
software projects and GFDL for hardware projects.

Due to law, hardware is de facto always released under a BSD style licence.  I
didn't have any problem with the fact that my hardware is under BSD. Neither
had I problem with my software being released under GPL.

CL<

1 ... 3456