3 ms·

But that's only if you want to mix code. It's fine to mix software which is usually what's done. The BSD kernel layer is very small. Personally I think the who

But that's only if you want to mix code. It's fine to mix software which is usually what's done. The BSD kernel layer is very small. Personally I think the whole license thing is a bit overrated anyway. It's more the GNU crowd making this a huge thing, whereas the BSD approach is more like "do whatever you want". Another thing why the BSD camp fits me better. Personally I don't really care about licenses, it's just some legalese to me (I never bother to read or obey EULAs either for example). And if I share some of my code as FOSS I don't even assign a license. But that's just my personal thing.

jraph 3y ago
> But that's only if you want to mix code. Yes, although any GPL program in the BSD land cannot grant the same freedoms than BSD programs and will have to be filtered out for some use cases, which weakens the point of the BSD distributions a bit. That's not only the kernel, it's also userspace tools. > It's more the GNU crowd making this a huge thing, the BSD approach is more like "do whatever you want" I don't believe this to be the case. Some people in the BSD world are adamant that their code should not be contaminated by the GPL for instance because suddenly, they could not grant the rights to their users to take the code and put it into a proprietary product. Some people in the BSD world have a strong opinion on how permissive licenses are the right way to do open source / free software. > the GNU crowd making this a huge thing I believe this to be a huge thing though. It is a huge thing. You should care what people can and cannot do with your code. Maybe you care that people can do "whatever you want" with your code. I think it's worth stopping and thinking about this stuff and the consequences for a moment, at least once. The world is very little "don't care, whatever", things have consequences and maybe you care about some of them. Surely you deeply care about some things? (of course there's no bad answer, you can answer no) I myself think the GPL is the better option in most cases, because I care that the end users' freedom is guaranteed. I pretty much don't want developers to do "whatever they want" with my work, I want them to respect their own users' freedom. This is highly political/philosophical of course. (there are exceptions, for example for codecs you might want the code to be as permissive as possible so the free codec itself is spread and is not replaced with a proprietary one for instance)
- stiray 3y ago
  > Some people in the BSD world are adamant that their code should not be contaminated by the GPL Yes, and? They want people to be able to use their code freely, without limitations. Check golang packages, they are mostly BSD/MIT. Thats why BSD is in Playstation and Macs. You think there would be linux GPLed code? There is a usecase for everything and linux doesnt cover them all.
  - jraph 3y ago
    >> Some people in the BSD world are adamant that their code should not be contaminated by the GPL > Yes, and? And? Nothing. I'm making an observation, I'm not judging here. They have a strong stance on this, often because they deeply thought about the consequences. I don't agree with them, and I don't care for helping Apple and Sony make their proprietary products, I think we'd probably be in a better world if they participated in improving the commons and that's actually how Linux succeeds, but I respect this stance when it's well thought out.
    - stiray 3y ago
      I think that there is completely different reason why they dont participate in improving the linux. As its fundamental mantra of "move fast, break things" is creating bigger and bigger gnordian knot, while FreeBSD mantra is being well though, designed and stable. SystemD will never get into FreeBSD. Docker is still behind FreeBSD jails (released 2000!) that are a security feature since the start. And so on. And people using and developing it, like such system, which linux is absolutely not. For fun check this beauty: https://man.freebsd.org/cgi/man.cgi?query=setfib&apropos=0&sektion=0&manpath=FreeBSD+8.1-RELEASE&format=html https://man.freebsd.org/cgi/man.cgi?query=setfib&apropos=0&s... This why we use FreeBSD. As not only its kernel but also its userspace is well designed.
      - jraph 3y ago
        The *BSD have their merits beyond licensing matters indeed, including technical, design, organizational. That's what would make me look into them.

jraph 3y ago

> But that's only if you want to mix code. Yes, although any GPL program in the BSD land cannot grant the same freedoms than BSD programs and will have to be filtered out for some use cases, which weakens the point of the BSD distributions a bit. That's not only the kernel, it's also userspace tools. > It's more the GNU crowd making this a huge thing, the BSD approach is more like "do whatever you want" I don't believe this to be the case. Some people in the BSD world are adamant that their code should not be contaminated by the GPL for instance because suddenly, they could not grant the rights to their users to take the code and put it into a proprietary product. Some people in the BSD world have a strong opinion on how permissive licenses are the right way to do open source / free software. > the GNU crowd making this a huge thing I believe this to be a huge thing though. It is a huge thing. You should care what people can and cannot do with your code. Maybe you care that people can do "whatever you want" with your code. I think it's worth stopping and thinking about this stuff and the consequences for a moment, at least once. The world is very little "don't care, whatever", things have consequences and maybe you care about some of them. Surely you deeply care about some things? (of course there's no bad answer, you can answer no) I myself think the GPL is the better option in most cases, because I care that the end users' freedom is guaranteed. I pretty much don't want developers to do "whatever they want" with my work, I want them to respect their own users' freedom. This is highly political/philosophical of course. (there are exceptions, for example for codecs you might want the code to be as permissive as possible so the free codec itself is spread and is not replaced with a proprietary one for instance)

stiray 3y ago
> Some people in the BSD world are adamant that their code should not be contaminated by the GPL Yes, and? They want people to be able to use their code freely, without limitations. Check golang packages, they are mostly BSD/MIT. Thats why BSD is in Playstation and Macs. You think there would be linux GPLed code? There is a usecase for everything and linux doesnt cover them all.
- jraph 3y ago
  >> Some people in the BSD world are adamant that their code should not be contaminated by the GPL > Yes, and? And? Nothing. I'm making an observation, I'm not judging here. They have a strong stance on this, often because they deeply thought about the consequences. I don't agree with them, and I don't care for helping Apple and Sony make their proprietary products, I think we'd probably be in a better world if they participated in improving the commons and that's actually how Linux succeeds, but I respect this stance when it's well thought out.
  - stiray 3y ago
    I think that there is completely different reason why they dont participate in improving the linux. As its fundamental mantra of "move fast, break things" is creating bigger and bigger gnordian knot, while FreeBSD mantra is being well though, designed and stable. SystemD will never get into FreeBSD. Docker is still behind FreeBSD jails (released 2000!) that are a security feature since the start. And so on. And people using and developing it, like such system, which linux is absolutely not. For fun check this beauty: https://man.freebsd.org/cgi/man.cgi?query=setfib&apropos=0&sektion=0&manpath=FreeBSD+8.1-RELEASE&format=html https://man.freebsd.org/cgi/man.cgi?query=setfib&apropos=0&s... This why we use FreeBSD. As not only its kernel but also its userspace is well designed.
    - jraph 3y ago
      The *BSD have their merits beyond licensing matters indeed, including technical, design, organizational. That's what would make me look into them.