3 ms·

For me it's very simple - when I see GPL 3, I move on - even for personal uses. I can't imagine why I'd want anything to do with this license either. It's an u

by Proven 5y ago

For me it's very simple - when I see GPL 3, I move on - even for personal uses. I can't imagine why I'd want anything to do with this license either. It's an unnecessary burden. Just stay away from it.

EvanAnderson 5y ago
Why is GPL 3 objectionable for personal uses?
- bachmeier 5y ago
  The completely serious answer is that some have turned this into a religion. GPL software is simply impure to them, so they won't touch it.
  - squarefoot 5y ago
    Which brings us to the question: would we be here if there had been no GPL at all?
    - pjmlp 5y ago
      No we wouldn't. The UNIX world and Windows would keep taking BSD code, assuming the court case would have ended the same way as it did, and that was it. The GPL haters tend to forget that GCC was pretty much ignored until Sun started the trend to split UNIX into user and developer editions, and without GNU there wouldn't be a userland for Linus to plug into Linux. Whatever, all UNIX clones that came after Linux (specially for IoT) are BSD/MIT based, so the long term roadmap is already quite obvious.
- Proven 5y ago
  Because I have to mind the license. Let's say today it's just for personal use. I modify it to work the way I want it, then 2 months later I decide to provide its output on my Web site. Now I have to publish the source code that includes modifications I've made. It's a burden in terms of both labor and time - I must perform this work against my will and for free because of GPL 3.0. I need to remove hard-coded parameters and arguments from scripts for security and privacy reasons, I need to create a repo and update it every time my code changes, etc. Why would I want to do that? Another example would be if I ever decided to use that code as part of my application and decide to share my application (even with friends, for free), now I either have to rewrite or replace the GPL 3.0 component, or else I have no choice but to force everyone downstream to use GPL 3.0. Some can't, some won't - to these folks, my app would be completely useless. If, on the other hand, I find a permissively licensed 3rd party program, library or script, I don't have to worry about it now or in the future, whether I run it on my own site, mix it with other code, or decide to share it with anyone.
haram_masala 5y ago
My strategy is to ignore the license and do whatever the hell I want. So far I’ve been 100% successful with it.

by Proven 5y ago

EvanAnderson 5y ago

Why is GPL 3 objectionable for personal uses?

bachmeier 5y ago
The completely serious answer is that some have turned this into a religion. GPL software is simply impure to them, so they won't touch it.
- squarefoot 5y ago
  Which brings us to the question: would we be here if there had been no GPL at all?
  - pjmlp 5y ago
    No we wouldn't. The UNIX world and Windows would keep taking BSD code, assuming the court case would have ended the same way as it did, and that was it. The GPL haters tend to forget that GCC was pretty much ignored until Sun started the trend to split UNIX into user and developer editions, and without GNU there wouldn't be a userland for Linus to plug into Linux. Whatever, all UNIX clones that came after Linux (specially for IoT) are BSD/MIT based, so the long term roadmap is already quite obvious.
Proven 5y ago
Because I have to mind the license. Let's say today it's just for personal use. I modify it to work the way I want it, then 2 months later I decide to provide its output on my Web site. Now I have to publish the source code that includes modifications I've made. It's a burden in terms of both labor and time - I must perform this work against my will and for free because of GPL 3.0. I need to remove hard-coded parameters and arguments from scripts for security and privacy reasons, I need to create a repo and update it every time my code changes, etc. Why would I want to do that? Another example would be if I ever decided to use that code as part of my application and decide to share my application (even with friends, for free), now I either have to rewrite or replace the GPL 3.0 component, or else I have no choice but to force everyone downstream to use GPL 3.0. Some can't, some won't - to these folks, my app would be completely useless. If, on the other hand, I find a permissively licensed 3rd party program, library or script, I don't have to worry about it now or in the future, whether I run it on my own site, mix it with other code, or decide to share it with anyone.

haram_masala 5y ago

My strategy is to ignore the license and do whatever the hell I want. So far I’ve been 100% successful with it.