3 ms·

>A permissive license, by definition, cannot prevent an entity from contributing to it. Nor can a copyleft licence 'prevent' an entity from contributing it. It

>A permissive license, by definition, cannot prevent an entity from contributing to it. Nor can a copyleft licence 'prevent' an entity from contributing it. It is a choice, just as someone could choose to only contribute to permissive projects they could also choose to only contribute to copyleft licenced projects, so I fail to see what point you are trying to make here. >I've never heard anyone tell me they won't use a permissively licensed project for any reason related to its licensing. Now you bring up 'use' which is different from 'contributing'. And given that copyleft requires the source code to be open, it can't be used with proprietary projects (which of course permissively licenced code can), but that is by design as copyleft exist to give end users the rights which proprietary software typically removes. >and makes an assumption about removing road blocks from using open source projects. And I pointed out the assumption is flawed since he (dragonwriter) talked about 'contribution'. Saying that a lot of 'entities' are happy to _use_ permissively licenced code is not the same as them _contributing_ code under permissive licences. > I merely stated that the claim made by dragonwriter actually factors into my decision to use permissive licenses. And I merely pointed out that there are other factors than 'maximising code use' which developers may consider when licencing their code. Oh, and I'd like to take the opportunity to thank you for Wingo, really like it!

burntsushi 13y ago
I never said the GPL was a roadblock for people contributing code. I said it was a roadblock for people using it. Pure and simple: someone works for an employer whose policy is not to use GPL'd code. Therefore, they cannot use any code I publish under the GPL license. No such policy exists (that I've heard of) for permissively licensed code. > Now you bring up 'use' which is different from 'contributing'. You're the one who said "contributing"! :-) I initially said "use" several comments ago: "I want to maximize the number of people using my software." > Oh, and I'd like to take the opportunity to thank you for Wingo, really like it! Thanks :-) Come hang out on IRC/FreeNode at `#wingo`. (Although it's kind of dead.)
- gillianseed 13y ago
  > never said the GPL was a roadblock for people contributing code. I said it was a roadblock for people using it. Ah, yes you did, however the claim you initially referenced talked about contributing code, not using. >Thanks :-) Come hang out on IRC/FreeNode at `#wingo`. (Although it's kind of dead.) Maybe I will dust off irssi and drop by :)

burntsushi 13y ago

I never said the GPL was a roadblock for people contributing code. I said it was a roadblock for people using it. Pure and simple: someone works for an employer whose policy is not to use GPL'd code. Therefore, they cannot use any code I publish under the GPL license. No such policy exists (that I've heard of) for permissively licensed code. > Now you bring up 'use' which is different from 'contributing'. You're the one who said "contributing"! :-) I initially said "use" several comments ago: "I want to maximize the number of people using my software." > Oh, and I'd like to take the opportunity to thank you for Wingo, really like it! Thanks :-) Come hang out on IRC/FreeNode at `#wingo`. (Although it's kind of dead.)

gillianseed 13y ago
> never said the GPL was a roadblock for people contributing code. I said it was a roadblock for people using it. Ah, yes you did, however the claim you initially referenced talked about contributing code, not using. >Thanks :-) Come hang out on IRC/FreeNode at `#wingo`. (Although it's kind of dead.) Maybe I will dust off irssi and drop by :)