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.
Thread beginning with comment 515127
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
This picture seems limited
by trev on Sat 21st Apr 2012 21:24 UTC
trev
Member since:
2006-11-22

Sorry but this stat seems to project a very limited view? Say there are 200 new projects and 50 choose license A. Of those 2 survive and thrive. Now saw there are 50 that choose license B and 10 of them survive and thrive. Even if license A gets more adoption it has a higher death rate too so in the end there are more "in use" projects using license B. My point is this stat by itself is really not a good metric. For most people looking around at the projects you use and seeing the licenses used is more important.

For me there are many projects I use that use GPL of some sort and some that use MIT, BSD, etc. Right now by and far the GPL is the dominant license in most of the desktop software. The server side has much more players that weigh in at varied levels (GPL, Apache, postgresql, etc.) but there the GPL is the most common as well. I know the linux kernel, xen, drupal nagios and ejabberd use it. I think apache would likely be the number 2 license in use by the server software I use most.

This discussion as it is framed seems a bit pointless to me. If I wanted to make the GPL look to be used less I can simply start 1000 non-gpl projects on sourceforge. If I want it to look good I start 1000 gpl projects. Wow, a HUGE shift in licensing preference that means .... nothing.

Reply Score: 6