My only issue is that both you and Patrik have made your views more than known, and it's obvious you hate the GPL and GPL-style licenses with a vengance.. for whatever reason (which, as someone who has worked on commercial projects involving the GPL, are not - in my experiance and opinion - based in any substanciated fact whatsoever)..
Please do not find me guilty by association. I'm sorry to say it but I don't think Brett Glass have helped my case at all, rather the opposite, because it seems obvious that many people seem to have a hard time seperating the various anti-LGPL view.
I personally do not hate the GPL nor GPL-style licenses, I think they have a place in the world, but that place is not nessarily in the Wine project.
I have tried to explain why throught countless mails so I will not do it again, just say that I'm not in the I-hate-the-GPL-club rather in the I-don't-think-your-understand-the-price-you-have-to-pay-club or the I-don't-wish-to-pay-the-price-club if you prefer.
So now you've made your point, constantly, how about we just take it for granted that for every email sent to the list saying 'the gpl is good because...' you and Patrik will reply with 'No! It's evil, RMS is satan, viral licensing, noone will use it, blah blah blah'....
I have never said that. I do admit that Brett Glass have said that. However _I_ do not agree.
At 02:19 AM 2/16/2002, Patrik Stridvall wrote:
So now you've made your point, constantly, how about we just take it for granted that for every email sent to the list saying 'the gpl is good because...' you and Patrik will reply with 'No! It's evil, RMS is satan, viral licensing, noone will use it, blah blah blah'....
I have never said that. I do admit that Brett Glass have said that.
No, I never have.
--Brett
On Sat, 16 Feb 2002 10:19, Patrik Stridvall wrote:
So now you've made your point, constantly, how about we just take it for granted that for every email sent to the list saying 'the gpl is good because...' you and Patrik will reply with 'No! It's evil, RMS is satan, viral licensing, noone will use it, blah blah blah'....
I have never said that. I do admit that Brett Glass have said that. However _I_ do not agree.
He may have strong emotions against GNU licenses, yet I consider him more the opposite of Stallman. While Glass is strongly against GNU licenses, Stallman is strongly against closed-source.
I think a good test of a license is how little lawyer-speak is in it: (WINE's license - texinfo at top) (GLIBC's LGPL) wc -l 19 482
BSD wins. :) Anyone have a Microsoft EULA, as a file, handy?
Sean -------------- scf@farley.org
At 08:20 AM 2/16/2002, Sean Farley wrote:
He may have strong emotions against GNU licenses, yet I consider him more the opposite of Stallman. While Glass is strongly against GNU licenses, Stallman is strongly against closed-source.
It would be more accurate, I think, to say that Stallman is strongly against "anything which is not licensed under a license he has written." He has attacked all licenses that are not his, including the BSD and X11 licenses. His main complaint about them seems to be that they do not further his anti-business goals.
--Brett
-
Brett Glass -
Patrik Stridvall -
Sean Farley