Re: Recommendation for a CL data structures library

[David Kastrup]

Raffael Cavallaro <raffaelcavallaro@pas.espam.s.il.vous.plait.mac.com>
writes:

> On 2010-03-21 22:14:30 -0400, Pascal J. Bourguignon said:
>
>> Sure.
>>
>> And the question remains why you should imposes your choices on me?
>
> My principal objection to the GPL is that its license requirements
> regarding opening source code make it very unpopular with many
> commercial developers, and therefore whenever possible, they choose
> non-GPL alternatives.

That's perfectly fine since what makes the source code unpopular with
the commercial developers also stops them from contributing back.  So
there is no loss.

> In short, I don't think GPL licensing gets you anything additional in
> terms of getting code open sourced. Users who need to keep their
> source closed either won't use it, or will use in in a way that allows
> them not to open the source (e.g., Paul Graham's viaweb and their use
> of the GPL CLISP).

It does not get you "anything additional", but it gets you something
_less_: a proprietary product that uses your own code to draw your user
base away from you.

> Meanwhile, users of LLGPL or BSD, etc. licensed code frequently open
> source whatever they are able as contributions back to the relevant
> project. Giving users the choice of what they will and won't open
> source results in more users, and just as many open source
> contributions.

The real world tends to disagree by example.

Yes, I'd prefer a world in which Richard Stallman was pretty much wrong
about everything, too.

But one has to make the best from what one actually got.

-- 
David Kastrup