4 ms·
People care about free software to different degrees. For example, the Mozilla Public License used by LibreOffice is neither free in the way of the GPL, nor fr
by brudgers 4y ago
People care about free software to different degrees.
For example, the Mozilla Public License used by LibreOffice is neither free in the way of the GPL, nor free in the way of BSD or MIT...MPL lives in a middle ground between as--in-beer and as-in-freedom.
Personally, convenience is one of the reasons I run LibreOffice on Windows. Sure, all things being equal, I would rather not pay for Office. And all things being equal, I would rather use non-proprietary software.
Of course all things are never equal. And one of my personal turnoffs is managing the type of subscriptions, upgrades, etc. that are inevitable with proprietary software these days...Stay-off-my-lawn [redacted].
- boomboomsubban 4y ago>For example, the Mozilla Public License used by LibreOffice is neither free in the way of the GPL, nor free in the way of BSD or MIT...MPL lives in a middle ground between as--in-beer and as-in-freedom. The MPL, GPL, and BSD licenses are all free as in freedom and generally free as in free beer, though as this article shows they don't have to be. They have different limitations, but let's not add another three more definitions to the already overworked word "free." The GPL is copyleft, the BSD license is permissive, and the MPL is in between.