3 ms·

> Where you get the "or pay 10000€" part from? Most likely from the manpage: If you use --will-cite in scripts to be run by others you are making it h

> Where you get the "or pay 10000€" part from? Most likely from the manpage: If you use --will-cite in scripts to be run by others you are making it harder for others to see the citation notice. The development of GNU parallel is indirectly financed through citations, so if your users do not know they should cite then you are making it harder to finance development. However, if you pay 10000 EUR, you have done your part to finance future development and should feel free to use --will-cite in scripts. If you do not want to help financing future development by letting other users see the citation notice or by paying, then please consider using another tool instead of GNU parallel. You can find some of the alternatives in man parallel_alternatives. FWIW some distros remove the nagging message (e.g. mine - openSUSE - has it removed and the patch seems to come from Debian so i'd guess Debian and its derivatives also remove it).

capableweb 3y ago
Again, it's not part of the license nor are you forced to select between "cite GNU parallels or pay 10000 EUR". You're free to use it however you want since the software is GPL, including ignoring any of the output from using the tool if you so chose to.
- badsectoracula 3y ago
  I answered where that comes from, not if it is part of the license (it isn't).
- paulmd 3y ago
  > including ignoring any of the output from using the tool if you so chose to. the user isn't merely ignoring the output though, they are actively interacting with the program in a way that the program is presenting as accepting of the agreement being presented to the user. the agreement is plainly presented in a way that implies that it's an obligation, like any other clickwrap agreement. and everyone except ole and stallman seems to agree that it's self-evidently apparent that it's a clickwrap agreement restricting the freedoms of the user. "free software that only prints a message and exits unless you agree to a clickwrap with further licensing terms" is not a road that FSF should go down. And it's only because of the GPL severability clause that it's not a crisis, everyone knows it's a farce, except for a bunch of the users, who are affirmatively taking action to indicate consent with an additional licensing agreement. it's not facially clear that in most jurisdictions that the clickwrap agreement is null and void merely because the software is free. you can end up paying for lots of free stuff in life if you're not careful. you agreed to the agreement, it's on you. you are of course free to remove the prompt and use the software yourself, and ole rants and raves about that on his website. but, agreeing to the license is a separate thing from the GPL license, most likely. just like paying for credit monitoring is different from getting your free credit reports or freezes - they'll try and railroad you into paying, definitely! and just because it's supposed to be free, doesn't mean you're not getting charged if you agree to it!

capableweb 3y ago

Again, it's not part of the license nor are you forced to select between "cite GNU parallels or pay 10000 EUR". You're free to use it however you want since the software is GPL, including ignoring any of the output from using the tool if you so chose to.

badsectoracula 3y ago
I answered where that comes from, not if it is part of the license (it isn't).
paulmd 3y ago
> including ignoring any of the output from using the tool if you so chose to. the user isn't merely ignoring the output though, they are actively interacting with the program in a way that the program is presenting as accepting of the agreement being presented to the user. the agreement is plainly presented in a way that implies that it's an obligation, like any other clickwrap agreement. and everyone except ole and stallman seems to agree that it's self-evidently apparent that it's a clickwrap agreement restricting the freedoms of the user. "free software that only prints a message and exits unless you agree to a clickwrap with further licensing terms" is not a road that FSF should go down. And it's only because of the GPL severability clause that it's not a crisis, everyone knows it's a farce, except for a bunch of the users, who are affirmatively taking action to indicate consent with an additional licensing agreement. it's not facially clear that in most jurisdictions that the clickwrap agreement is null and void merely because the software is free. you can end up paying for lots of free stuff in life if you're not careful. you agreed to the agreement, it's on you. you are of course free to remove the prompt and use the software yourself, and ole rants and raves about that on his website. but, agreeing to the license is a separate thing from the GPL license, most likely. just like paying for credit monitoring is different from getting your free credit reports or freezes - they'll try and railroad you into paying, definitely! and just because it's supposed to be free, doesn't mean you're not getting charged if you agree to it!