FC4 or FC5

jdow jdow at earthlink.net
Fri Jun 16 06:20:33 UTC 2006


From: "Peter Gordon" <peter at thecodergeek.com>

> Les Mikesell wrote:
>> Peter Gordon wrote:
>>> and would need to continuously prove their superiority to
>>> potential users and developers in other ways (such as: What is the quality
>>> of
>>> the codebase? What attention is paid to proactive security?
>>
>> I don't see how the license has any bearing at all here.  Can you give
>> an example of Linux vs. (say) one of the *BSD's where using the GPL
>> matters in this regard.
> 
> The license has bearing here because it if were a BSD-like license, then
> they would be competing (in theory) on features along, not the overall
> user experience or quality of code.
> 
>>> > Yes, preventing many similar useful products.
>>> Please name one specific product example that has been prevented from being
>>> marketed and/or sold by the GPL.
>>
>> An OSX like system, complete with drivers for all hardware and other
>> licensed components along with a GPL'd kernel.
> 
> Wrong! OS X is based on FreeBSD's code, and other open source things
> which Apple has released under their APSL (whose recent revisions *are*
> GPL-compatible, if I recall correctly). Apple is in no way required to keep
> their OS X kernel open source, yet they do anyway because of the good
> community PR and development support it gains for them.

One might be able to repeat that "Wrong!" right back atcha if something
I read yesterday on slashdot was right. The rumor was that Apple was
taking the OS back to closed source. {^_-}

{^_^}




More information about the fedora-list mailing list