4 ms·
When I choose MIT over GPL I'm usually trying to make my work as easy for others to adopt as possible. I want some of the software I wrote to become a commodity
by japhyr 11y ago
When I choose MIT over GPL I'm usually trying to make my work as easy for others to adopt as possible. I want some of the software I wrote to become a commodity. The MIT seems a clearer path to commoditized software than the GPL.
Is that a reasonable line of thinking?
- icebraining 11y agoYes, and in fact rms himself has made that decision in the past.
- japhyr 11y agoThat's the LGPL, right?
- icebraining 11y agoNo, rms actually support moving from the LGPL to BSD, to achieve the maximum possible reach of the software: http://lists.xiph.org/pipermail/icecast-dev/2001-February/000005.html http://lists.xiph.org/pipermail/icecast-dev/2001-February/00...
- mikegioia 11y agoI think this is for one hyper-specific case that he in fact "okayed" the switch to BSD. In response to the change of license, Richard Stallman of the Free Software Foundation says, "I agree. It is wise to make some of the Ogg Vorbis code available for use in proprietary software, so that commercial companies doing proprietary software will use it, and help Vorbis succeed in competition with other formats that would be restricted against our use.