On Fri, 2002-07-26 at 17:07, Robinson Maureira Castillo wrote:
> On Fri, 26 Jul 2002, Cort Dougan wrote:
>
> > The problem of not having enough resources to achieve a given goal has
> > plagued mankind for years. Open-source, GPL or magic dust are not going
> > to solve that problem.
>
> I Agree.
>
> But I don't think that the kernel should adopt this new license, what stop
> some developers to fork another tree under the GPL?
Nothing is preventing them, and that's a good thing. As at is now,
everyone can fork a kernel. And everybody is inteligent enough to know
which one to pick.
If they want to switch the license to GPL, they have to start with a 1
year old source or stick to the fGPL.
Now, It may be true that some projects should not be fGPLd or have
exceptions, for one reason or another. It's up to the developers to
decide what's best for them.
> IMHO, kernel should stay free...
Free as in no money to the developers? It isn't really free. You need
Internet access to download the kernel (or to buy a CD), a computer and
electricity among other things. And the developers need to eat, to have
bandwith donate, hardware donated, etc.
Federico
> Best regards
> --
> Robinson Maureira Castillo
> Asesor DAI
> INACAP
>
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b29 : Tue Jul 30 2002 - 14:00:25 EST