Forwarded message:
From llp-owner@obelix.chemie.fu-berlin.de Mon Dec 7 17:59:05 1998 X-Authentication-Warning: obelix.chemie.fu-berlin.de: majordomo set sender to owner-llp using -f Message-ID: <XFMail.981207090304.danny@holstein.tritonetd.com> X-Mailer: XFMail 1.1 [p0] on Linux Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit MIME-Version: 1.0 In-Reply-To: <Pine.SGI.3.91.981201222534.10972B-100000@bragg.chemie.fu-berlin.de> Date: Mon, 07 Dec 1998 08:48:14 -0500 (EST) From: "Danny G. Holstein" <danny@holstein.tritonetd.com> To: Claus Schroeter <clausi@chemie.fu-berlin.de> Subject: Re: linux-gpib licensing Cc: llp@obelix.chemie.fu-berlin.de, James Minyard <jminyard@lanhopper.com> Sender: owner-llp@obelix.chemie.fu-berlin.de Precedence: bulk
On 01-Dec-98 Claus Schroeter wrote:
On Tue, 1 Dec 1998, James Minyard wrote:
I was wondering if you would consider changing the license for the libgpib portion of the linux-gpib distribution from GPL to LGPL.
I'd like to register my thoughts here.
I believe the best model to how the GPL can work is how Apache and IBM handled it. IBM wanted to include the server with a system, they were willing to pay but there was no one to pay, in the end, they paid with the only currency that would work, namely, IBM added some code to the Apache server and was allowed to inlude it with their system. Stick with GPL. No one should be able to sell the work of another person as his own, with GPL, one is assured that the cost of using a code is merely that of returning improvements to the code. ...Dan ------- To get more information on the Linux-Lab Project see: http://www.llp.fu-berlin.de/