Re: Why is Fedora not a Free GNU/Linux distributions?


On Fri, 2008-07-18 at 13:41 -0700, Antonio Olivares wrote:
Sure, there is one, and that's exactly it. The LGPL is
one example of a
license that protects the code while permitting the
creation of derived
works with mixed components. The CPL is another. There
are several
more listed at opensource.org. The MySQL open-source
exception to the
GPL is another workable alternative (at least for the case
where all
components are free[1]).

Excellent, OpenOffice is released under the LGPL, with the L becoming
Lesser GPL, which does not restrict the sharing of code. Can Linux be

The FSF calls this the "lesser" GPL because they have
moral/philosophical objections to allowing this kind of sharing. The
LGPL (AKA the Library GPL) is a concession to the reality that some such
combined works are too useful to block. Imagine the state of GNU/Linux
and open source if only GPLed works could be linked with glibc.

released under the LGPL? at least to allow the the mixing and sharing
of code that is restricted by the real GPL.

Almost certainly not. The kernel is a prime example of the challenges
involved in getting the cooperation that Alexandre refers to. All
authors would have to agree. There are probably thousands of them and
at least some of them are GPL zealots who would never agree to such
terms.


If only we had control of all the pieces and could specify
the
licenses...

When we try to take free software components from other
sources with
different (even free!) licenses and combine them to create
new free
works, we are often stymied by the failure of the GPL to
permit the
distribution of the result. And it is not always possible
(and almost
never easy) to resolve the conflicts.

[1] I think it also could be useful to be able to combine
free and
proprietary software to create new works.

--
http://www.math.clemson.edu/~mjs

I agree with [1] here. I believe Les agrees with you here as well :)

Regards,

Antonio





--
Matthew Saltzman

Clemson University Math Sciences
mjs AT clemson DOT edu
http://www.math.clemson.edu/~mjs

--
fedora-list mailing list
fedora-list@xxxxxxxxxx
To unsubscribe: https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-list

Relevant Pages

  • [PATCH] change libata license from OSL+GPL to GPL
    ... - changes license of all code from OSL+GPL to plain ole GPL ... indicate your decision by deleting the provisions above and ...
    (Linux-Kernel)
  • Re: Copyleft and embedded Forth
    ... rights of another. ... Developer may do with p.d. ... Use isn't an issue with any free software license. ... You have to choose to use GPL software. ...
    (comp.lang.forth)
  • Re: module license taints kernel.
    ... you can't use a license ... At least this is how the GPL is ... you cannot use a license to turn actions that do not violate ... copyright law, not as defined in the GPL or in the common sense ...
    (comp.os.linux.development.system)
  • Re: GPL compliance
    ... Your main intent seems to be to spread FUD about the GPL and because ... every piece of code that is packaged has a copyright file. ... worrying only about the Canonical license for the whole CD and I was ... what does Red Hat have to do with it? ...
    (Ubuntu)
  • Re: Why is Fedora not a Free GNU/Linux distributions?
    ... license that protects the code while permitting the ... GPL is another workable alternative (at least for the case ... When we try to take free software components from other ...
    (Fedora)