3 ms·
I want to share my code with everyone. That includes: * (1st-order capitalists) People who want to make a buck * (2nd-order capitalists) People who don't min
by xamuel 12y ago
I want to share my code with everyone. That includes:
* (1st-order capitalists) People who want to make a buck
* (2nd-order capitalists) People who don't mind if 1st-order capitalists use their work
* (3rd-order capitalists) People who don't mind if 2nd-order capitalists use their work
* (Etc., nth-order capitalists for all n)
That makes me an ωth-order capitalist. Unfortunately, GPL is anti-ωth-order capitalist (Proof: Induction). I can't ever use it unless I'm willing to kick people under the bus who I'd rather allow to use my code.
- belorn 12y agoNothing prevents you from licensing your code BSD while using GPL-licensed software. You can use what ever library or software out there which is GPL and if you always use BSD or MIT license, you can share your code that you wrote with whoever and for whatever purpose. People who receive it can then use your code for what ever, and only need to follow the GPL if that also use the code which you have not written.
- deleted 12y ago[deleted]
- xamuel 12y agoThat doesn't make any sense. If people could take GPL code and switch it to MIT license then GPL would be meaningless: 1. Take the GPL project you want 2. Add a comment somewhere, publish the resulting derivative under MIT 3. Use it however you want, while flipping off Gnu Sure, I can (and do) use GPL software, personally. But I can't use GPL sourcecode in projects I publicly release. If I did, that part of my sourcecode would have to be GPLed. * Which means it couldn't be used by anyone (set A) who can't use GPL. * Which means it couldn't be used by anyone (set B) who wants to share with people in set A. * Which means it couldn't be used by anyone (set C) who wants to share with people in set B. * So on forever.
- gillianseed 12y ago>That doesn't make any sense. If people could take GPL code and switch it to MIT license then GPL would be meaningless He never said that, he said you can you can combine your permissively licensed code with GPL licensed code and _your_ code will still be available as permissive. You stated that you wanted to share _your_ code with 'everyone', nothing prevents you from doing that. Someone else's GPL licensed code is NOT _your_ code just because you decide to use it.
- s73v3r 12y agoThose people in Set A and so on have made their own choice, that they do not wish to share with their users. The only people preventing them from using GPL software is themselves.
- deleted 12y ago[deleted]
- __david__ 12y agoThinking of it as "kicking people under the bus" a little reductive. There are 2 classes of people using your work: developers who want to make a derivative work based off your code and end users who want to use either your code or the derivative work. Who exactly are you kicking under the bus? The developers, or the end users? The GPL optimizes for end-users, "kicking developers under the bus", and the BSD/MIT licenses optimize for developers and "kick the users under the bus". Which group do you optimize for? Arguably, if you want "maximum freedom" in the world, you'd optimize for the end users, since there are going to be more of them than the developers.
- jimktrains2 12y ago> Arguably, if you want "maximum freedom" in the world, you'd optimize for the end users, since there are going to be more of them than the developers. Not to mention the developers are 1) normally end users and 2) couldn't be developers of said software if you didn't release your software the way you did.
- s73v3r 12y agoThere's absolutely nothing in the GPL that prevents any of those people from using your code.
- davidgerard 12y agoThe GPL kicks people who want to take and not give back in turn under the bus. You're completely failing to make any case that this is a flaw.