To view parent comment, click here.
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
I have looked it up, repeatedly over the years. The MIT license is also known as the X11 license, and is on the list of software compatible with the GNU GPL. You referenced the licenses that were incompatible with the GNU GPL, which is the ones they get mad at you for using. At least that is the portion of the page your link took me to.
RMS is the least tolerant person in the software world.
He is the guy that won't do an interview unless Linux is referred to as GNU/Linux.
He believes that creating proprietary software is a criminal act.
If he had his way he would ban every license except the GPL. The LGPL only exists out of political necessity. RMS has even written an essay on why you shouldn't use it for new libraries.
In my conversations with RMS, he has been a very very tolerant person actually. Like I said he has recommended other licenses such as MIT on occasions before. He has certain principles but he has historically been a very pragmatic person.
I know that is not the image you get if you don't deal with him personally but don't judge people before you really get to know them






Member since:
2005-07-06
Sorry, that's not the case either. It is just a repeated myth. They have several FSF/GNU software licensed under LGPL or more permissive licenses. RMS himself recommended using MIT license for the Ogg codecs reference implementation. Look it up.