> In netuse.lists.linux-kernel you write:
> >just FYI: you're collecting more and more points why I personally
> >don't like GPL anymore and probably won't use it in the future for
> >some sort of projects.
>
> The GPL was designed in the age of static linking and before
> object orientation (read: linking to foreign code via names
> instead of addresses) became popular.
>
> Dynamic linking, which is just like loading, which is allowed by
> the GPL or no GPL program would ever run on propietary OSes,
> does not fit well into the model of the GPL.
Are we talking about the regular GPL, or the LGPL?
> Making two pieces of software work together as an integral
> system via message passing does not fit into the GPL model at
> all. That was why the GPL failed to infect the entire Beos. Now,
> just think of a Qt server communicating with a KDE app or Kimp
> by message passing or a Qt being part of the X server, an X
> extension. The GPL does not handle this at all.
>
> Via object orientation you can build upon GPLed work without
> modifying the GPL source at all. Your classes simply inherit and
> overwrite the GPL base classes, but this is different source and
> the GPL source is left absolutely intact and unmodified - you
> only refer to it by name. The clearly is a violation of the
> spirit of the GPL, but the GPL does not handle this at all.
>
>
> The GPL is about 5 to 8 years behind the current design in
> operating systems and applications and does not cope well with
> common situations encountered in modern environments.
Matthew D. Pitts
mpitts@suite224.net
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@vger.rutgers.edu
Please read the FAQ at http://www.altern.org/andrebalsa/doc/lkml-faq.html