Re: Recommendation for a CL data structures library

[Andrew Haley]

In gnu.misc.discuss Raffael Cavallaro 
<raffaelcavallaro@pas.espam.s.il.vous.plait.mac.com> wrote:
> On 2010-03-21 22:14:30 -0400, Pascal J. Bourguignon said:
> 
> 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.

The choose non-GPL alternatives because they want their software not
to be free, unlike the libraries they use.

> In short, I don't think GPL licensing gets you anything additional in 
> terms of getting code open sourced.

But history says otherwise.  For example, there's a lot of code in gcc
that is there because the customer was told that if they wanted their
gcc extension (custom back-end, front-end changes, etc) they'd have to
release it under the GPL.

> I think people should avoid GPL licensing their work as a pragmatic
> means of ensuring maximal adoption. Ironically, the FSF understood
> this dynamic which is why they created the Library GPL, now known as
> the Lesser GPL.

There's nothing ironic about it.  The FSF seeks to maximize freedom,
so licenses code whichever way works best.  Libraries sometimes have
different needs from applications.

Andrew.