Re: [oc] Inquiry

[<cyrano@nerim.net>]

Niclas Hedhman <niclas@hedhman.org> a écrit :

> First of all, I don't like being quoted out of context. I also don't like, 
> when you try to portray that a particular behaviour implies additional 
> behaviour.
> 

I cut text to save bandwith. 

> 
> On Wednesday 07 May 2003 05:45 am, nico@seul.org
> wrote:
> > Niclas Hedhman &amp;lang=fr">niclas@hedhman.org>
> a écrit :
> 
> > You don't want to give back you're "added value" to linux, for example.
> But
> > you find "normal" to use for free millions lines of code that would cost
> > billions dollars in developpement if donne by a compagny. Give back
> > improvement (to you're customers !) is the fees to use free software.
> 
> It is not about "improvements", which I DO contribute back, if practical, to
> 
> various OSS projects, most notably Apache since I DO use a lot of Apache 
> software in various forms, both "off-the-shelf", code fragments in 
> development and frameworks to build other products on top of.
> 
> > If you develop GPL code and somebody else, only sells it without any
> > improvement (like for nessus), that's unfare. But look at linux ! IBM,
> > Oracle, SUN, Suse, Red Hat,... give improvement and each one benefit of
> the
> > work of the others.
> 
> 
> > > However, I use a lot of Apache licensed (think BSD) code, BECAUSE they
> > > don't
> > >
> > > impose any unreasonable restrictions;
> >
> > "unreasonable restriction" have you read the "CLUF" of windows, millions
> > people accept condition far more restrictive ! No garanties, you must
> > accept automatic update ,...
> 
> And I DON'T use Windows beyond the fact that ONE TOOL requires me to run it 
> (Protel DXP). Everything else is executed in Linux, a paid for distribution 
> from RedHat.

I give a general statement. Beside that you use Windows, because you don't have the choice (like me).

> Also, it doesn't say that all code I develop I have to send back to Microsoft,
> 

Neither GPL. GPL imply code back to the custmers when you modify existing code. Beside that have you seen any microsoft copyrighted code ? There "shared sources" means look at it but if you modify anything give it back to us and never distribut it.

> or more radically, all spreadsheets developed are automatically sent to MS.

Neither GPL. Gnumeric nor gcc produice data to be force by GPL (that will be illegal to force that).

> 
> > > 1. Not allowed to use their name to promote the product.
> > > 2. Not allowed to remove the copyright statement in source files.
> >
> > You want to remove copyright statement ? That's a kind of "moral"
> stealing,
> > don't you think ?
> 
> Who the F**K said I want to remove the Copyright?? This really pisses me
> off.
> You go off and learn how to read before you accuses me of "moral stealing".
> 

ok should be a misreading.

> 
> > Where is the difference between BSD licence and GPL licence ? The only
> > difference is that with GPL you must distribute your modification to your
> > customers. If you do it with BSD like one, why do you make a difference
> > with GPL code ?
> 
> > > Most usage is either in form of
> > > a. utilizing a service provided, for instance creation of SVG files.
> > > b. a plug-in to add additional services to a framework.
> > > Both would be impossible with the GPL, without exposing my trade
> secrets.
> >
> > Funny. You use Apache, some piece of work that could cost you billions to
> > develop but you find anormal to help the project a little.
> 
> Not only can you not read, you don't know math either. Tomcat, for instance,
> 
> doesn't cost billions to develop. You are off by several magnitudes.

I speak about the estimated cost of linux by common economical methode published some years ago.

> Also, why don't we ask the Apache Software Foundation themselves and the 
> developers (like me) who contribute time into these projects?
> 
> 
> > > Bottom line; Most corporations of any size today, have already been
> > > through the legal hoo-haa of GPL and made a policy surrounding it, and
> > > probably other
> > >
> > > OSS licenses as well. My dozen or so contacts mostly have the following
> > > policy in place;
> > > 1. For using a GPL/BSD licensed product in operations = OK.
> > > 2. For using GPL in product devlopment = NO.
> >
> > That's the most complicated part. But a lot of compagny begin to use it
> > (websphere for IBM, opencascade http://www.opencascade.com/ for EADS Matra
> > Datavision,...) They want to impose there framework and there leadership
> > with it, but for the benefit of every one. (what is the best : having 100%
> > of a 10M$ market or 40% of a 200 M$ one ?)
> 
> Sorry this paragraph does not compute. Can I get a GPL'd version of
> WebSphere?
> Is that what you are saying? Or are you saying there is GPL'd code used inside
> 
> WebSphere, and they are breaching the license?
> 

Websphere is opens source. It's a bunch of software. I can't find quickly a global licence.

> Commercial developers, like myself, will not survive on love alone. Everyone,
> 
> Linus included, needs to generate income, one way or the other.

? Linus did not live of linux. Other majors linux developpers work for various compagny, like Red Hat, Suse, IBM,... They live for there experties.

> The Apache way, is basically a matter of, WE ALL work on the horizontal 
> application to the best of our ability and time. We charge money for vertical
> 
> applications that each one of us build on top of the horizontal one.
> BUT, FSF/GNU is against the concept that software engineers need food on the
> 

Not that's false. RMS/FSF just say that GPL don't speak about money. And they want to create a virtous cycle in the freesoftware developpement.(if you find glib a nice library and avoid reinventing the wheel you must write GPL code) 

Why can't you charge customers to write new feature ? Cygnus (red hat) make a living by porting new cpu to gcc, for example.

> table, and says; If you link your code into GNU developed software, you have
> 
> to give your software away as well. That is not FREEDOM, that is SLAVERY!!

No that's freedom. True one. Don't you blame you're gouvernement not to have the liberty of killing your annoying neighbourg ? That's a philosophical point. To enhance liberty of every one, you must restrict it a little bit. (forbiden to kill to have the right to live)

> 
> 
> Sorry, everybody, that I have a harsh attitude, but please put the blame on 
> "nicO", to afraid to announce full and real name.
> 

That's a question of habit to write "nicO". 

nicO (Nicolas Boulay)

> Cheers
> Niclas
> 
> 
> --
> To unsubscribe from cores mailing list please visit http://www.opencores.org/mailinglists.shtml



___________________________________
Webmail Nerim, http://www.nerim.net/


--
To unsubscribe from cores mailing list please visit http://www.opencores.org/mailinglists.shtml