4 ms·
"MIT licensed" ...and consequently limited driver support. Copyleft is permissive. There's no need for non-copyleft licensing unless you want restrictive propr
by pointfree 11y ago
"MIT licensed"
...and consequently limited driver support. Copyleft is permissive. There's no need for non-copyleft licensing unless you want restrictive proprietary licensing somewhere or sometime.
- ci5er 11y ago"Limited driver support", here, means ... you don't have access to, and the right to fork, the source code? As an old engineer, to me, limited driver support always meant: "not that many drivers". You seem to mean: "I can't fork". Or am I mis-reading you? Many of those of us in the new-new world of next-gen system-integrators-acting-like-new-software-product-developer types don't always have sole control over the drivers in the/our stack necessary to deliver key features to key clients. The "hard" open source position of the copy-left crowd incentivizes old-school pragmatic management to take a "why bother" stance and instead of open sourcing 80% and getting yelled at because it isn't 100%, just go with 0%. Which is sad. An unnecessary. The won't deal with the very real business risk that happens when you liberally treat with zealots. Or am I (I ask again) mis-reading you?
- lolidaisuki 11y ago80% isn't any better than 0%.