3 ms·

You are dead wrong. Blink was the re-creation of webkit; one more GPL license that wasted everyone's time and money by forcing a full rewrite, one more tragedy.

You are dead wrong. Blink was the re-creation of webkit; one more GPL license that wasted everyone's time and money by forcing a full rewrite, one more tragedy. The Android libraries (as opposed to Java engine, app store, etc) that Google recreated are open source, and not locked in to Google, many others use them. It's not reasonable to hope to banish proprietary code entirely, especially since open source hasn't really found a good, general business model yet. Open source code that businesses will use and contribute to is winning the day; GPL has been a bad wrong-turn. Again, copyleft might work - but the software and hardware patent grabs that come with GPL2 and GPL3 simply haven't. Such an incredible waste. It's hard to find historical parallels.

flukus 10y ago
> You are dead wrong. Blink was the re-creation of webkit; one more GPL license that wasted everyone's time and money by forcing a full rewrite, one more tragedy. Blink is a fork of webkit, it's still under the LGPL. But I see where you've gone wrong now, you're attributing every OSS rewrite that also includes a license change to being rewritten because of licensing, which is simply not true. Without webkit being LGPL though, they never would have got to the point where they could fork it. > It's not reasonable to hope to banish proprietary code entirely, especially since open source hasn't really found a good, general business model yet. Open source code that businesses will use and contribute to is winning the day; GPL has been a bad wrong-turn. The GPL doesn't banish proprietary software and never will. It banishes GPL software from becoming closed software.
- Nomentatus 10y ago
  False, but this has been argued elsewhere in the forums, see https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Blink_(web_engine) https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Blink_(web_engine) to see it does have a BSD license.

flukus 10y ago

> You are dead wrong. Blink was the re-creation of webkit; one more GPL license that wasted everyone's time and money by forcing a full rewrite, one more tragedy. Blink is a fork of webkit, it's still under the LGPL. But I see where you've gone wrong now, you're attributing every OSS rewrite that also includes a license change to being rewritten because of licensing, which is simply not true. Without webkit being LGPL though, they never would have got to the point where they could fork it. > It's not reasonable to hope to banish proprietary code entirely, especially since open source hasn't really found a good, general business model yet. Open source code that businesses will use and contribute to is winning the day; GPL has been a bad wrong-turn. The GPL doesn't banish proprietary software and never will. It banishes GPL software from becoming closed software.

Nomentatus 10y ago
False, but this has been argued elsewhere in the forums, see https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Blink_(web_engine) https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Blink_(web_engine) to see it does have a BSD license.