Linked by Thom Holwerda on Sat 21st Apr 2012 19:25 UTC
GNU, GPL, Open Source "A new analysis of licensing data shows that not only is use of the GPL and other copyleft licenses continuing to decline, but the rate of disuse is actually accelerating." This shouldn't be surprising. The GPL is complex, and I honestly don't blame both individuals and companies opting for simpler, more straightforward licenses like BSD or MIT-like licenses.
Permalink for comment 515320
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
RE[3]: Practical considerations
by Excarnate on Mon 23rd Apr 2012 03:41 UTC in reply to "RE[2]: Practical considerations"
Member since:

He said "license with the least restrictions possible". He didn't say "give up copyright".

No duh. Basically, I was saying his/her stance of being the least restrictive (with a subtext of holier-than-thou) is not true.

S/he understands the benefits of licencing but isn't honest enough to say "License X has this requirement which is enough for me, I don't care about the other things."

Someone who truly wants their code to have the fewest restrictions will release it to the public domain. Someone who wants what the GPL provides (the inability for someone else to restrict said code and further developments at whim) will use that. The BSD license is fine, the apache license is fine, the MIT license is fine, so are most of the others, but taking a stance that you take the least restrictive license to allow ones code to travel the furthest had better be releasing into the public domain (to allow any use) or using the GPL (to force it to be spread widely--if it is worthwhile).

I'm a bit surprised I had to explain both of my comments. Surely the use of irony and sarcasm aren't unknown on the Internet.

Reply Parent Score: 2