Fedora Freedom and linux-libre
Andrew Haley
aph at redhat.com
Thu Jun 19 16:37:08 UTC 2008
Alexandre Oliva wrote:
> On Jun 18, 2008, Matthew Saltzman <mjs at clemson.edu> wrote:
>
>> Then can we at least agree that there are sometimes unfortunate
>> consequences to the GPL's failure to permit one to share a work
>> combining two pieces of *free* software because of relatively minor[1]
>> license incompatibilities?
>
> Yeah, it's unfortunate when this happens.
Definitely. It's something that GPL V3 has tried hard to fix,
wherever possible.
However, I must point out that in some cases post-GPL licences
have *deliberately* been worded in a way that makes them incompatible
with GPL code. Whatever the consequences, it's not appropriate to
blame the GPL for those.
>> In fact, I think it's arguable that there are sometimes unfortunate
>> consequences to the GPL's failure to permit one to share a work that
>> makes use of a GPL library and a proprietary library.
>
> Sparing a user from becoming dependent on a piece of proprietary
> software might even be a sacrifice for the user, but it's actually an
> advantage for the user and for society in the long run.
Perhaps.
I think we have to think about, for example, gcc ports. The fact that
people who do ports of gcc are forced to ship the source for their
changes has made a lot of free code available that wouldn't have been
if they had been permitted to link proprietary code into gcc.
Andrew.
More information about the fedora-devel-list
mailing list