3 ms·

> GPL guys feel ignore[d], BSD guys feel elated. Well that's quite a big "speak for yourself" if I ever saw one. If you're only in it for being recognized, AN

by skore 14y ago

> GPL guys feel ignore[d], BSD guys feel elated. Well that's quite a big "speak for yourself" if I ever saw one. If you're only in it for being recognized, ANY project you embark upon will be a huge disappointment, at least for quite a long while. On the contrary, I think most FOSS projects solve a need, particularly (and yes, sometimes only) for the lead developer. If it solves the needs of others, they will jump in. The license doesn't really enter into that part of the equation. It's only about whether or not you want to make a call on what that community around your work looks like and evolves. You're very much forcing the argument by making it all about the attention of "large proprietary software companies". But there are... other entities besides large proprietary software companies and I rather enjoy seeing where those people are going.

NateDad 14y ago
I didn't mean they care about recognition... I meant, no community forms around their product, because a huge portion of the developers that would like to use it, can't. I never said "large" companies. Small companies can't use GPL in their software either, if they want to sell their software. For-profit companies aren't evil, in fact many of them do a lot of good things, including contributing back to open source projects with time paid for by their closed source products. I think the mindset of "all for-profit companies are evil" is a very 2003 way of thinking.
- NateDad 14y ago
  (note... I did say large.. my bad... still valid that small companies can't use GPL either)
- skore 14y ago
  There are a lot of for-profit companies that use GPL. I have one myself (albeit a very, very small one). As for community - I think community is often more corresponding to usefulness of code, not license of code. That's why there is often a huge "community" around very useful proprietary code. To me, it's about choosing which kind of community you want and I want the kind that the GPL enables and protects.

by skore 14y ago

NateDad 14y ago

I didn't mean they care about recognition... I meant, no community forms around their product, because a huge portion of the developers that would like to use it, can't. I never said "large" companies. Small companies can't use GPL in their software either, if they want to sell their software. For-profit companies aren't evil, in fact many of them do a lot of good things, including contributing back to open source projects with time paid for by their closed source products. I think the mindset of "all for-profit companies are evil" is a very 2003 way of thinking.

NateDad 14y ago
(note... I did say large.. my bad... still valid that small companies can't use GPL either)
skore 14y ago
There are a lot of for-profit companies that use GPL. I have one myself (albeit a very, very small one). As for community - I think community is often more corresponding to usefulness of code, not license of code. That's why there is often a huge "community" around very useful proprietary code. To me, it's about choosing which kind of community you want and I want the kind that the GPL enables and protects.