Re: [Nolug] BSD vs GPL

A lot of that has historical roots though. Linux came up as a "clean
room" style implementation of *nix tech. While Linux was being
developed in the '90s there was still a lot of concern about the legal
status of the BSD codebase in terms of ownership. So while Linux was
building momentum the *BSD community was dealing with legal questions
pertaining to the ownership of their code.

And at some point the Linux kernel got big-business buy-in behind it
which only accelerated its momentum even more.

-James

On Wed, Jul 15, 2009 at 1:14 PM, Mark A. Hershberger<mah@everybody.org> wrote:
> Simon Dorfman <simon@yamlike.com> writes:
>
>> http://daringfireball.net/linked/2009/07/06/mullenweg-gpl
>
> concludes:
>
>    To wit: that GPL-licensed software projects discourage participation
>    from developers working on anything other than other GPL-licensed
>    software projects. That’s pretty much the stated goal of the
>    FSF. BSD-licensed projects encourage participation from developers
>    working on just about anything.
>
> Absolutely true.  However, the authors ignore the size (note, I say
> nothing about quality) of the community of Linux Kernel developers vs
> *BSD Kernel developers.  The more restrictive license is generating a
> larger community of developers and users.
>
> And please don't bring up the pitiful desktop market share argument.  I
> said “Users”, not “Desktop Users”.
>
> Mark.
>
>
> --
> http://hexmode.com/
>
> Every day, mindful practice.  When the mind is disciplined, then the
> Way can work for us.  Otherwise, all we do is talk of the Way; everything
> is just words; and the world will know us as its one great fool.
> ___________________
> Nolug mailing list
> nolug@nolug.org
>

-- 
James Thompson
Plain Programs
New Orleans, LA
P: (502) 619.0353
E: james@plainprograms.com
W: www.plainprograms.com
___________________
Nolug mailing list
nolug@nolug.org