2 ms·
Why is this pointed out? Most software has some license. GPL is an approved open source license. It grands all required freedoms to the users. The parent comm
by still_grokking 8y ago
Why is this pointed out? Most software has some license.
GPL is an approved open source license. It grands all required freedoms to the users.
The parent comment reads instead as if the software wasn't free. But it is. So there is no problem in using it. Perhaps only politics…
This anti-GPL campaign is slowly getting really tiring!
- usefulcat 8y agoHow is it that merely pointing out the license is considered anti-GPL? Would that fact not be considered a good thing by anyone who favors the GPL?
- still_grokking 8y agoPointing to the fact that it's GPL licensed in such a tone sounds like a warning, and I'm quit sure exactly that was the intention. Or else why would someone stress that fact? Never read something along the lines: "Note for anyone considering this: it's BSD licensed."
- josephg 8y agoThe GPL and BSD licenses aren’t symmetric. Nobody warns about something being BSD licensed because you can freely incorporate a BSD licensed library into any project without changing the license of the resulting project. But the reverse is not true - if you embed GPL software in a BSD project (or commercial project), the resulting work must be licensed under the GPL. I prefer all the opensource software I write to use a BSD style license, because I want to retain the ability to use any of my opensource work in commercial projects. GPL warnings like this are useful for me - it’s good to know that I can’t use this library in any of my projects (at least until they change the license).