Linked by Thom Holwerda on Sat 29th Sep 2007 21:24 UTC, submitted by Kishe
GNU, GPL, Open Source "A research firm serving the mobile phone industry has published an 18-page whitepaper about open source licensing. Entitled 'GPLv2 vs. GPLv3', the paper examines the meteoric rise of open source software, and the forces that shaped each license, before concluding with an extremely detailed point-by-point comparison."
Permalink for comment 275652
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
RE BSD license.
by sbergman27 on Tue 2nd Oct 2007 03:24 UTC in reply to "RE BSD license."
sbergman27
Member since:
2005-07-24

"""

The GPL is not a barrier to code sharing, it's a mandater of it.

"""

Virtually no FOSS project which is not under GPL can use code from a GPL'd project. Even GPLv2 projects are prohibited from using GPLv3 code. That's a huge barrier to code sharing. A one-way barrier, though, for the most part, since great care has been taken by the GPLvX authors to ensure what they term "compatibility" with other FOSS licenses. That means making sure that GPL projects can take from other projects as they please, without the donor projects receiving anything in return.

I'm willing to accept that situation as (possibly) being good for FOSS as a whole. But please do not just ignore the fact that copyleft licenses do erect barriers to code sharing in the FOSS world.

I would file your argument in the "sometimes the benefits outweigh the disadvantages" category.

Edited 2007-10-02 03:30

Reply Parent Score: 1