3 ms·

Except the the claim he is making is that free software is fundamentally different than open source. "The values of free software are fundamentally different f

• _jwo_ 13y ago
  https://www.gnu.org/philosophy/free-sw.html https://www.gnu.org/philosophy/free-sw.html http://www.gnu.org/licenses/license-list.html http://www.gnu.org/licenses/license-list.html clang is "free software" according to his own definition. It is entirely possible for a specific free software program to be a setback to the goals of the free software movement. His position is that copyleft licenses (very often, and certainly in this specific case) advance the goal of freedom more effectively than non-copyleft licenses. The differing values in this case basically amounts to whether one considers it worth using a copyleft license to ensure that the software being used remains free, or whether one considers it a drawback that a copyleft license may prevent it being used in proprietary software.
• kevin_bauer 13y ago
  Interesting! The last time i looked, almost 100% of all compiled software of the linux-franchise was gcc-compiled, even a large portion of iOS and android software is gcc-compiled, and it doesn't stop there! Furthermore which compiler-suite served as so long so good in the "dark" pre-LLVM ages? Biting the hand, which feeds you comes to mind...