3 ms·
By the same token, it might also be nice to see FSF advocates taking on board the notion that they have brought some of this on themselves with newer versions/v
by cmsj 11y ago
By the same token, it might also be nice to see FSF advocates taking on board the notion that they have brought some of this on themselves with newer versions/variants of the GPL.
- pgeorgi 11y agoWhile I consider the GPLv3 family to be shoddy licenses in practice (I wasn't aware that it's possible to build a wall of text that makes seasoned lawyers run away, screaming), I understand the rationale. First, that there were devices shipping GPLv2 code that couldn't be replaced. Remember that the entire FSF story began with a printer driver that couldn't be replaced. Tivo struck a nerve there. Second, the SaaS phenomenon which, again, works around the spirit of the GPLv2 for which the (already existing) Affero GPL license was integrated properly through some notion of a modular license (GPLv3 + extensions for the "L" or "A" specializations, instead of three completely distinct texts).
- cmsj 11y agoAbsolutely, I hope I didn't convey a message that I think the licenses aren't without justification. I do think that they have gone too far though, and I think that is somewhat supported by the (as I see it, at least) lack of interest in v3/AGPL from large companies involved in FOSS. If anything, from the part of the universe that I observe closest (cloud stuff mainly, especially OpenStack), the exact opposite of what FSF would want, is happening. Projects seem to be choosing far more strongly to go with much more liberal licenses such as the Apache Licence.