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 515134
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
BSD vs GPL - again
by toast88 on Sat 21st Apr 2012 22:05 UTC
toast88
Member since:
2009-09-23

And here we go, yet another GPL vs BSD flame war. Aren't these getting boring?

What's the point of discussing these? Most projects and contributors have already lined out why they're using the GPL, they want to make sure that companies and enterprises who take advantage of free software actually contribute something back which is simply not the case and which is why BSD is not widely adopted.

The reason why Linux and associated projects like KDE and GNOME have become so massively successful is the GPL and hence there won't be a shift regarding the use of it.

It doesn't matter whether many small projects jump to using BSD or similar licenses as long as the most important projects like the Linux kernel, KDE, GNOME, gcc, VideoLAN, wine, GIMP, emacs, inkscape, LibreOffice and so on. And, of course, I'm using the GPL/LGPL for my own projects.

The GPL-backed Linux runs on more architectures than any other operating system ever conceived, supports more features than any operating system ever conceived, powers 90% of the top500, powers hundreds of millions of smart phones, most web servers and so much more. Still people come out of their caves and claim how superior *BSD is ;) . *yawn*

Reply Score: 3

RE: BSD vs GPL - again
by Soulbender on Sun 22nd Apr 2012 03:19 in reply to "BSD vs GPL - again"
Soulbender Member since:
2005-08-18

The reason why Linux and associated projects like KDE and GNOME have become so massively successful is the GPL


And here I was, thinking they are popular because they are actually good.

The GPL-backed Linux runs on more architectures than any other operating system ever conceived, supports more features than any operating system ever conceived, powers 90% of the top500, powers hundreds of millions of smart phones, most web servers and so much more. Still people come out of their caves and claim how superior *BSD is . *yawn*


It's funny that when we're talking about Linux quantity equals quality but when we're talking about Windows it doesn't.

Reply Parent Score: 3

RE: BSD vs GPL - again
by Drumhellar on Sun 22nd Apr 2012 08:19 in reply to "BSD vs GPL - again"
Drumhellar Member since:
2005-07-12

The reason why Linux and associated projects like KDE and GNOME have become so massively successful is the GPL and hence there won't be a shift regarding the use of it.


I figured Gnome and KDE are so successful primarily because of the quality of software. In fact, KDE became successful DESPITE fears regarding licensing of QT. Yes, these fears spurned the creation of Gnome, but these were fears that were resolved a long time ago.

most important projects like the Linux kernel, KDE, GNOME, gcc, VideoLAN, wine, GIMP, emacs, inkscape, LibreOffice and so on.
... most web servers ...


With the exception of GCC, and possibly VLC (and obviously Linux), I would argue that Apache is more widely used than all of the others combined, and it has a permissive license.

Reply Parent Score: 2

RE[2]: BSD vs GPL - again
by Lennie on Sun 22nd Apr 2012 08:48 in reply to "RE: BSD vs GPL - again"
Lennie Member since:
2007-09-22

If you look at number of installations, something like busybox (used on a lot of embedded Linux systems) probably is more widely used.

Obviously that is hard to measure though.

Busybox is GPLv2-only-and-not-v3 like the Linux kernel I believe.

Reply Parent Score: 4