5 ms·

> I'm sure that if Linux wasn't GPL, you'd have 'vendors' selling 'HP Linux' and 'Corp Linux' to their locked in customers in no time at all. The only reason Li

by dan00 9y ago

> I'm sure that if Linux wasn't GPL, you'd have 'vendors' selling 'HP Linux' and 'Corp Linux' to their locked in customers in no time at all. The only reason Linux grew up to this point is that the vendors are forced to contribute back and cooperate (up to a point). I don't know. For such a complex project like linux you can't do all by yourself and you most likely want all the improvements and extensions done by other people. To be able to incorporate all these changes you have to keep your code base compatible and the easiest way to do this is to give back your changes. But even if this seems to be the most sensible way to go, an other license might have allowed people to be a lot more unreasonable.

pjmlp 9y ago
The *BSDs show clearly what would have happened, most hardware vendors that ship some BSD variant on their hardware don't contribute anything back.
- dan00 9y ago
  Saying that the only difference for these big projects is their license, seems quite a bit simplified. How is the contribution process organized? How willing are the developers to incorporate foreign extensions? There a quite a few factors that determine how such big projects work and at the end it's IMHO always the people involved that make the difference.
- petre 9y ago
  That is simply not true. For instance iXsystems contributes back to FreeBSD snd also sponsors the foundation. On the other hand a lot of WiFi router vendors violate the GPL by not releasing the code and contribute nothing back to Linux.
  - asdfjlkasdf88 9y ago
    most != all And one counter-example isn't enough refutation. not saying i believe either of you. just saying, language matters.
    - subway 9y ago
      NetApp Juniper Sony Apple Panassas.... These all have commits to FreeBSD. When you use it, you do tend to collaborate with upstream a bit.
  - jra_samba 9y ago
    For every iXsystems (who are excellent Free Software citizens) you have many NetApp, EMC and Isilons, who use the FreeBSD code to build profitable products on and give nothing in return. NetApp is a very good example, as they contribute NFS code back to Linux but not FreeBSD. Why do you think that might be ?
    - X86BSD 9y ago
      A more complete lie you could not have stated. Check the FreeBSD commit logs. All those vendors commit code back to the project. I see commits almost everyday from them. But thanks for spewing lies.
      - thesuitonym 9y ago
        It's easier to hand out these alternative facts that support the GPL's mission.
      - jra_samba 9y ago
        Where can I download the Isilon OneFS code ? Are you hosting it in the FreeBSD repository ? I'm so glad it got released, and so like.EMC to do it so modestly without a press release. Or are you just pointing at minor fixes random engineers from these companies are doing occasionally ?
    - 2trill2spill 9y ago
      >For every iXsystems (who are excellent Free Software citizens) you have many NetApp, EMC and Isilons, who use the FreeBSD code to build profitable products on and give nothing in return. NetApp is a very good example, as they contribute NFS code back to Linux but not FreeBSD. Literally every company you mentioned contributes code to FreeBSD, so what are you even talking about[1][2][3]? [1]: https://freshbsd.org/search?project=freebsd&q=netapp https://freshbsd.org/search?project=freebsd&q=netapp [2]: https://freshbsd.org/search?project=freebsd&q=emc https://freshbsd.org/search?project=freebsd&q=emc [3]: https://freshbsd.org/search?project=freebsd&q=iXsystems https://freshbsd.org/search?project=freebsd&q=iXsystems
  - xorcist 9y ago
    GPL enforcement of said wifi routers is the _only_ reason we have drivers for several wifi chipsets. Perhaps ironically, the BSDs benefited from this too.
- pmoriarty 9y ago
  Most of the people who are anti-GPL are either naive or want to profit off of someone else's code without contributing anything back. For me, GPL doesn't go nearly far enough, and I licence everything I write under AGPL.
  - pjmlp 9y ago
    For several reasons I use mostly commercial commercial software, but everything I write outside work regardless of how useless it may be, is always released under GPL.

by dan00 9y ago

pjmlp 9y ago

The *BSDs show clearly what would have happened, most hardware vendors that ship some BSD variant on their hardware don't contribute anything back.

dan00 9y ago
Saying that the only difference for these big projects is their license, seems quite a bit simplified. How is the contribution process organized? How willing are the developers to incorporate foreign extensions? There a quite a few factors that determine how such big projects work and at the end it's IMHO always the people involved that make the difference.
petre 9y ago
That is simply not true. For instance iXsystems contributes back to FreeBSD snd also sponsors the foundation. On the other hand a lot of WiFi router vendors violate the GPL by not releasing the code and contribute nothing back to Linux.
- asdfjlkasdf88 9y ago
  most != all And one counter-example isn't enough refutation. not saying i believe either of you. just saying, language matters.
  - subway 9y ago
    NetApp Juniper Sony Apple Panassas.... These all have commits to FreeBSD. When you use it, you do tend to collaborate with upstream a bit.
- jra_samba 9y ago
  For every iXsystems (who are excellent Free Software citizens) you have many NetApp, EMC and Isilons, who use the FreeBSD code to build profitable products on and give nothing in return. NetApp is a very good example, as they contribute NFS code back to Linux but not FreeBSD. Why do you think that might be ?
  - X86BSD 9y ago
    A more complete lie you could not have stated. Check the FreeBSD commit logs. All those vendors commit code back to the project. I see commits almost everyday from them. But thanks for spewing lies.
    - thesuitonym 9y ago
      It's easier to hand out these alternative facts that support the GPL's mission.
    - jra_samba 9y ago
      Where can I download the Isilon OneFS code ? Are you hosting it in the FreeBSD repository ? I'm so glad it got released, and so like.EMC to do it so modestly without a press release. Or are you just pointing at minor fixes random engineers from these companies are doing occasionally ?
  - 2trill2spill 9y ago
    >For every iXsystems (who are excellent Free Software citizens) you have many NetApp, EMC and Isilons, who use the FreeBSD code to build profitable products on and give nothing in return. NetApp is a very good example, as they contribute NFS code back to Linux but not FreeBSD. Literally every company you mentioned contributes code to FreeBSD, so what are you even talking about[1][2][3]? [1]: https://freshbsd.org/search?project=freebsd&q=netapp https://freshbsd.org/search?project=freebsd&q=netapp [2]: https://freshbsd.org/search?project=freebsd&q=emc https://freshbsd.org/search?project=freebsd&q=emc [3]: https://freshbsd.org/search?project=freebsd&q=iXsystems https://freshbsd.org/search?project=freebsd&q=iXsystems
- xorcist 9y ago
  GPL enforcement of said wifi routers is the _only_ reason we have drivers for several wifi chipsets. Perhaps ironically, the BSDs benefited from this too.
pmoriarty 9y ago
Most of the people who are anti-GPL are either naive or want to profit off of someone else's code without contributing anything back. For me, GPL doesn't go nearly far enough, and I licence everything I write under AGPL.
- pjmlp 9y ago
  For several reasons I use mostly commercial commercial software, but everything I write outside work regardless of how useless it may be, is always released under GPL.