Linked by Thom Holwerda on Sun 15th Oct 2006 11:02 UTC, submitted by michuk
GNU, GPL, Open Source "There is one huge difference between the free and non-free software that has some very practical implications in the way we use it. One of those implications are the dependencies between single software packages in the free software model. What do they have to do with the free software philosophy and why should not you be afraid of them? Read on to find this out."
Permalink for comment 171991
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
Develop From Scratch? I don't think so
by Yamin on Mon 16th Oct 2006 03:06 UTC
Member since:

"Closed-source non-free software is usually developed within a single software company. The whole code is developed from scratch, since non-free software cannot use the GPL-ed software by default. Thus, lots of effort is put into “reinventing the wheel”, that is reimplementing the tools that are already widely available on free licences."

Has the author worked on any proprietary software project? We use external libraries all the time. We just pay for and license them.

There are the ones that are provided by 'the development framework' (.NET, MFC...). In modern windows system, these MS dependencies are included with the OS.

There are other more nonstandard libraries that are used all the time. Typically, an application installs these privately.

"The lack of source code usually comes with the lack of friendly API for external programmers and lack of documentation (there are exceptions to this rule of course)."

The opposite is true. Since there is no source code. These external libraries have to include great APIs and documentation. I mean, they're selling them. Why would we pay for a library that's going to be hard to use?

The article really fails at trying to link issues of dependencies with the 'free/closed software model'

Reply Score: 1