3 ms·
Like the author of that article, you seem to be fixated on contributions being the measure of the GPL's success. Preserving the four freedoms is the goal of th
by keyist 17y ago
Like the author of that article, you seem to be fixated on contributions being the measure of the GPL's success.
Preserving the four freedoms is the goal of the GPL. Requiring people to contribute back is the means.
- antonovka 17y agoThe point is that the minute the "four freedoms" conflicts with "business priorities", we drop the GPL software like a hot potato. That is to say, the GPL hasn't really succeeded at protecting the "four freedoms", it's merely done so as a side effect of the success of GPL'd software. GCC sat on the top of the hill for a long time due to the fact that the GPL's restrictions were an acceptable cost. However, when it came time for a library-linkable compiler, look at what Apple did -- they didn't GPL their software to allow linking against GCC -- instead, they decided to sponsor development of a new compiler.
- krakensden 17y agoGCC does have a bit of a reputation as a nightmare codebase though- a new project using new techniques and tools (er.. LLVM) doesn't seem so unreasonable.