5 ms·

I clicked on that video and at the timestamp in the link the guy says they like FreeBSD because it's not GPL. Not that we have anything against GPL or the Free

by fefe23 8y ago

I clicked on that video and at the timestamp in the link the guy says they like FreeBSD because it's not GPL. Not that we have anything against GPL or the Free Software Foundation, but the BSD license is more collaborative. I'm paraphrasing here. Is there any actual evidence for that claim? I'm a Linux guy so my view is probably biased. All I'm seeing is BSD licensed projects being ripped off by corporations left and right. Maybe we mean different things with the word, sharing. Netflix using FreeBSD and their idea of giving back to the project is telling them this will lead to their code being tested really well? That sounds to me like "please create a web page for us for free, it will lead to more exposure for you". Why does FreeBSD then not have your TLS sendfile code? Linux has TLS sendfile. It was contributed by a corporation, as far as I know. Personally, I have always really liked the BSD projects. The people working on them have been nothing but professional and yet courteous, they tend to fix their security issues quickly. I would love for them to get paid properly. With money. Not with "exposure" or "we'll test your code".

boomboomsubban 8y ago
>I'm a Linux guy so my view is probably biased. All I'm seeing is BSD licensed projects being ripped off by corporations left and right. Maybe we mean different things with the word, sharing. Netflix using FreeBSD and their idea of giving back to the project is telling them this will lead to their code being tested really well? That sounds to me like "please create a web page for us for free, it will lead to more exposure for you". Where are you seeing these corporations ripping off FreeBSD? Netflix has contributed code in the past, currently over a thousand commits in FreeBSD, and there's no reason to doubt their intention to continue doing so.
- alacombe 8y ago
  I worked for 5 years for a company taking from *BSD and not contributing much. Lately they started monetary donation, but no code.
  - protomyth 8y ago
    Weirdly, I actually think that's a feature not a bug. It keep ill intentioned idiots from gumming up the works because they are forced to contribute and really don't have the corporate beliefs or culture that would make them productive and not a distraction.
    - alacombe 8y ago
      The problem is that BSD problem is not so much money, but manpower, on top of that the cathedral model does not really scale. Just from a technical standpoint, no BSD is using any modern DCVS, beside dragonfly.
      - protomyth 8y ago
        Money is always a problem, and fixes a lot of manpower issues when you can pay developers. The whole DCVS is a bizarre argument. I would have to see actual studies that show the BSD run organizations do not scale.
        alacombe 8y ago
        Lack of proper DCVS hinder the possibility of committers to publish early version of their work outside huge diff. Getting the code and submitting changes are a huge PITA. With the git/github/gitlab workflow, you can clone a project, fork it, push a fix and submit a PR faster than a CVS / SVN checkout. It's not hard to find out why 90's cathedral style hierarchies hinder development process. That being said, unless you are already a committer, it's gonna be very difficult to get your code blessed...
        protomyth 8y ago
        That being said, unless you are already a committer, it's gonna be very difficult to get your code blessed... Are there examples of this? Since I see people sending patches that aren't committers. I honestly would want to see some actual data.
- _emacsomancer_ 8y ago
  > Where are you seeing these corporations ripping off FreeBSD? It's not like FreeBSD has a shiny DE courtesy of Apple...
  - boomboomsubban 8y ago
    FreeBSD doesn't even have a DE, I have no clue what you are talking about here.
    - _emacsomancer_ 8y ago
      That is what I'm talking about. Apple has benefited from FreeBSD. (There is Lumina, in terms of DEs.)
      - boomboomsubban 8y ago
        This doesn't make any sense. FreeBSD never had a desktop environment, so how is Apple ripping them off by not giving them the one they made?
        _emacsomancer_ 8y ago
        The only way for me to make sense of your comments is to imagine that you're asserting not only that no-one would want to run a DE with FreeBSD but in fact that there is no way to run a desktop environment with FreeBSD. However, that is clearly not the case, since Xfce and KDE and so forth work on FreeBSD. Further, there is even a DE developed for TrueOS, which is FreeBSD-based: Lumina ( https://www.lumina-desktop.org/ https://www.lumina-desktop.org/ ).
        boomboomsubban 8y ago
        If you download a release of FreeBSD, that image will not contain a desktop environment. If you look through there source code, no desktop environment, something also true of Linux. Of course you can install third party packages, including a range of desktop environments. So, considering FreeBSD has no desktop environment, and likely little desire for one, how are they being ripped off by Apple's failure to give them their DE?
- pjmlp 8y ago
  Apple, Sony, a couple of companies selling routers,... They are on their right though, that is what the BSD licence is all about, code for free no questions asked.
  - IronBacon 8y ago
    Long time ago, didn't Microsoft pulled the complete TCP/IP stack from OpenBSD/FreeBSD? I think they still have an /etc/hosts hidden somewhere in their filesystem...
    - pjmlp 8y ago
      Yes, it got rewritten on Vista.
  - boomboomsubban 8y ago
    I'll grant you there are probably router companies ripping them off, though that's true of Linux too. Your other two have both contributed much back to FreeBSD, so I'm unsure what you mean.
    - pjmlp 8y ago
      With Linux there is a legal way to get hold of those contributions, to anyone willing to invest time and money into it. Yes, they have contributed back and I referred that in another thread, just not what they were supposed to under a copyleft license.
int_19h 8y ago
> Maybe we mean different things with the word, sharing Pretty much this. The BSD community doesn't see code being used in proprietary solutions as "ripped off".
- pjmlp 8y ago
  I am convinced that if the BSDs would be the only available free UNIX clones, most commercial UNIXes would still be a thing.
alacombe 8y ago
> but the BSD license is more collaborative. I'm paraphrasing here. It's pretty much impossible to get anything significant in BSDs without a commit bit, Linux is much more open to external contributions. Moreover, any "large" work is mostly discussed privately and only a huge patch (ie. thousands lines long) will be published publicly. Reviewing such patch independantly is pretty much impossible.

by fefe23 8y ago

boomboomsubban 8y ago

>I'm a Linux guy so my view is probably biased. All I'm seeing is BSD licensed projects being ripped off by corporations left and right. Maybe we mean different things with the word, sharing. Netflix using FreeBSD and their idea of giving back to the project is telling them this will lead to their code being tested really well? That sounds to me like "please create a web page for us for free, it will lead to more exposure for you". Where are you seeing these corporations ripping off FreeBSD? Netflix has contributed code in the past, currently over a thousand commits in FreeBSD, and there's no reason to doubt their intention to continue doing so.

alacombe 8y ago
I worked for 5 years for a company taking from *BSD and not contributing much. Lately they started monetary donation, but no code.
- protomyth 8y ago
  Weirdly, I actually think that's a feature not a bug. It keep ill intentioned idiots from gumming up the works because they are forced to contribute and really don't have the corporate beliefs or culture that would make them productive and not a distraction.
  - alacombe 8y ago
    The problem is that BSD problem is not so much money, but manpower, on top of that the cathedral model does not really scale. Just from a technical standpoint, no BSD is using any modern DCVS, beside dragonfly.
    - protomyth 8y ago
      Money is always a problem, and fixes a lot of manpower issues when you can pay developers. The whole DCVS is a bizarre argument. I would have to see actual studies that show the BSD run organizations do not scale.
      - alacombe 8y ago
        Lack of proper DCVS hinder the possibility of committers to publish early version of their work outside huge diff. Getting the code and submitting changes are a huge PITA. With the git/github/gitlab workflow, you can clone a project, fork it, push a fix and submit a PR faster than a CVS / SVN checkout. It's not hard to find out why 90's cathedral style hierarchies hinder development process. That being said, unless you are already a committer, it's gonna be very difficult to get your code blessed...
        protomyth 8y ago
        That being said, unless you are already a committer, it's gonna be very difficult to get your code blessed... Are there examples of this? Since I see people sending patches that aren't committers. I honestly would want to see some actual data.
_emacsomancer_ 8y ago
> Where are you seeing these corporations ripping off FreeBSD? It's not like FreeBSD has a shiny DE courtesy of Apple...
- boomboomsubban 8y ago
  FreeBSD doesn't even have a DE, I have no clue what you are talking about here.
  - _emacsomancer_ 8y ago
    That is what I'm talking about. Apple has benefited from FreeBSD. (There is Lumina, in terms of DEs.)
    - boomboomsubban 8y ago
      This doesn't make any sense. FreeBSD never had a desktop environment, so how is Apple ripping them off by not giving them the one they made?
      - _emacsomancer_ 8y ago
        The only way for me to make sense of your comments is to imagine that you're asserting not only that no-one would want to run a DE with FreeBSD but in fact that there is no way to run a desktop environment with FreeBSD. However, that is clearly not the case, since Xfce and KDE and so forth work on FreeBSD. Further, there is even a DE developed for TrueOS, which is FreeBSD-based: Lumina ( https://www.lumina-desktop.org/ https://www.lumina-desktop.org/ ).
        boomboomsubban 8y ago
        If you download a release of FreeBSD, that image will not contain a desktop environment. If you look through there source code, no desktop environment, something also true of Linux. Of course you can install third party packages, including a range of desktop environments. So, considering FreeBSD has no desktop environment, and likely little desire for one, how are they being ripped off by Apple's failure to give them their DE?
pjmlp 8y ago
Apple, Sony, a couple of companies selling routers,... They are on their right though, that is what the BSD licence is all about, code for free no questions asked.
- IronBacon 8y ago
  Long time ago, didn't Microsoft pulled the complete TCP/IP stack from OpenBSD/FreeBSD? I think they still have an /etc/hosts hidden somewhere in their filesystem...
  - pjmlp 8y ago
    Yes, it got rewritten on Vista.
- boomboomsubban 8y ago
  I'll grant you there are probably router companies ripping them off, though that's true of Linux too. Your other two have both contributed much back to FreeBSD, so I'm unsure what you mean.
  - pjmlp 8y ago
    With Linux there is a legal way to get hold of those contributions, to anyone willing to invest time and money into it. Yes, they have contributed back and I referred that in another thread, just not what they were supposed to under a copyleft license.

int_19h 8y ago

> Maybe we mean different things with the word, sharing Pretty much this. The BSD community doesn't see code being used in proprietary solutions as "ripped off".

pjmlp 8y ago
I am convinced that if the BSDs would be the only available free UNIX clones, most commercial UNIXes would still be a thing.

alacombe 8y ago

> but the BSD license is more collaborative. I'm paraphrasing here. It's pretty much impossible to get anything significant in BSDs without a commit bit, Linux is much more open to external contributions. Moreover, any "large" work is mostly discussed privately and only a huge patch (ie. thousands lines long) will be published publicly. Reviewing such patch independantly is pretty much impossible.