Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Is the GPL Really Declining?

meshedinsights.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

161–170 of 242 posts

Re: Is the GPL Really Declining?

#161

Post by pjmlp »

belorn wrote: post #107
pjmlp wrote: post #36

Yes it is, in about 10 years time, Linux kernel might be one of the few surviving GPL projects in wider use. We will get back to PD and shareware days, when releasing source code was a nice feature, but not necessarily compulsory. The speed embedded OEM are replacing gcc with clang in their forks, without having to keep contributing back, is a good example of things will evolve. Or the hardware companies that bundle…

Predicting the death of Debian in 10 years is a odd call since I have not seen any indication of decline in the use of Debian and its derivatives. Last time someone checked, projects in debian where around 90% GPL.

How many of those 90% GPL projects are actually used in the real world across companies, specially the SV loved ones?

Re: Is the GPL Really Declining?

#162

Post by pythonaut_16 »

dbcurtis wrote: post #137
wcummings wrote: post #111

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You're overlooking a big reason for the using the GPL I think: GPL projects are more attractive to certain communities of contributors. People are more willing to invest (potentially a lot of) their time in an open source project if they don't feel they're being taken advantage of. A lot of people don't feel great writing code for free if it's going to be relicensed and incorporated into a commercial product.

I've said for a long time that people should choose a license they way the choose a screwdriver, not the way they choose a religion. Your comment touches on both parts of that. Want code to be open forever, and for you and your contributors to not be taken commercial advantage of? GPL could be a good choice. Do you desire total world domination (for a new protocol, for instance) then go with something like MIT that a…

Somewhat off topic, but I've noticed people using the word 'religious' in arguments like this to mean more or less 'positions that one holds that are not based on logical reasoning but strong personal preference'.

Wouldn't dogmatic be the more appropriate word choice?

Re: Is the GPL Really Declining?

#163

Post by X86BSD »

jra_samba wrote: post #123
petre wrote: post #114

Earlier quoted context omitted.

That is simply not true. For instance iXsystems contributes back to FreeBSD snd also sponsors the foundation. On the other hand a lot of WiFi router vendors violate the GPL by not releasing the code and contribute nothing back to Linux.

For every iXsystems (who are excellent Free Software citizens) you have many NetApp, EMC and Isilons, who use the FreeBSD code to build profitable products on and give nothing in return. NetApp is a very good example, as they contribute NFS code back to Linux but not FreeBSD. Why do you think that might be ?

A more complete lie you could not have stated. Check the FreeBSD commit logs. All those vendors commit code back to the project. I see commits almost everyday from them. But thanks for spewing lies.

Re: Is the GPL Really Declining?

#164

Post by phkahler »

joshuamorton wrote: post #138
phkahler wrote: post #118

Earlier quoted context omitted.

>> I want anyone to be able to do whatever they want to with my code. That includes developers wanting to create a proprietary application. Telling them they can't is not freedom. You emphasized anyone but by allowing developers to take the code proprietary, their users (which are using your code) are being denied the freedom you promote. This is of course the distinction between GPL and BSD-type licenses. One gives…

>You emphasized anyone but by allowing developers to take the code proprietary, their users (which are using your code) are being denied the freedom you promote. This is of course the distinction between GPL and BSD-type licenses. One gives developers all the freedom they want while the other ensures that all users (including those using derivative works) are given those freedoms. Their users are not being denied the…

>> Their users are not being denied the freedom to use my code, their users are being denied the freedom to use their code, which is their right.

Unless they know it came from you and where to get it (which will not be advertised), they are. Also, after you die and your source code is gone, the derivative work could still go on to whatever success and none of the users of your code will have access to it except for that developer of the derivative work.

Re: Is the GPL Really Declining?

#165

Post by s73ver »

erikbye wrote: post #99
josephg wrote: post #96

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Does it look like we're not working on it? Frankly, yes. I can't speak for the experience on linux, but on mac Inkscape needs to: - Support high dpi displays - It needs to scroll and zoom smoothly. (There's no reason for it to lag while scrolling and zooming on a modern computer. Every other app on my system manages it). - It needs to use the operating system's menubar instead of xquartz. - Use native controls for…

Ok. You are talking about problems with the software on a proprietary system... Sorry, I don't support closed platforms. These problems do not exist on the Linux version.

You asked what needed to happen. They told you.

Even if you, yourself don't want to do it, the attitude you've taken here is exactly the attitude which drives people away from OSS.

Re: Is the GPL Really Declining?

#166

Post by phkahler »

joshuamorton wrote: post #138
phkahler wrote: post #118

Earlier quoted context omitted.

>> I want anyone to be able to do whatever they want to with my code. That includes developers wanting to create a proprietary application. Telling them they can't is not freedom. You emphasized anyone but by allowing developers to take the code proprietary, their users (which are using your code) are being denied the freedom you promote. This is of course the distinction between GPL and BSD-type licenses. One gives…

>You emphasized anyone but by allowing developers to take the code proprietary, their users (which are using your code) are being denied the freedom you promote. This is of course the distinction between GPL and BSD-type licenses. One gives developers all the freedom they want while the other ensures that all users (including those using derivative works) are given those freedoms. Their users are not being denied the…

>> The cynic in me really thinks its important to wonder why there exists a GNU, and not an organization formed around and sustained by the MIT license.

The cynic is me says the answer is that the people interested in MIT licensing are not very interested in sharing their work with others in an organization.

Don't get me wrong, there are instances where MIT or BSD licenses make sense. Desktop software is not one of them.

Re: Is the GPL Really Declining?

#167

Post by joshuamorton »

phkahler wrote: post #164
joshuamorton wrote: post #138

Earlier quoted context omitted.

>You emphasized anyone but by allowing developers to take the code proprietary, their users (which are using your code) are being denied the freedom you promote. This is of course the distinction between GPL and BSD-type licenses. One gives developers all the freedom they want while the other ensures that all users (including those using derivative works) are given those freedoms. Their users are not being denied the…

>> Their users are not being denied the freedom to use my code, their users are being denied the freedom to use their code, which is their right. Unless they know it came from you and where to get it (which will not be advertised), they are. Also, after you die and your source code is gone, the derivative work could still go on to whatever success and none of the users of your code will have access to it except for t…

>Unless they know it came from you and where to get it (which will not be advertised), they are.

And almost all licenses require attribution.

>Also, after you die and your source code is gone, the derivative work could still go on to whatever success and none of the users of your code will have access to it except for that developer of the derivative work.

This makes no sense. The source code of what I did will still be around, and still be attributed. Dying doesn't make my work disappear into the ether.

Re: Is the GPL Really Declining?

#168

Post by geokon »

ralmidani wrote: post #142
geokon wrote: post #127

I'm a bit surprised "dual licensing" hasn't come up at all in this discussion. To me that is the most logical next-step from the GPL. (ex: The Qt/JUCE people are using it to great effect) - If you want to work on expanding on what I started and then sharing it with everyone, then that's great! - If you want to make money with my work - then lets get in touch and work out some compensation. Seems only fair.. no? It's…

>It's a little fuzzy because you can have opensource projects that make money As I see it, the purpose of copyleft is not to prevent anyone from making money; if someone does want to use a copylefted work to make money, they'll just have to play fair and release their source code under the same license. In other words, what copyleft prevents is predatory use of "open source" which involves taking eagerly without givi…

Right, but doesn't this ends up giving SaaS and server side businesses a weird kinda-nonsensical advantage?

I'm thinking, say you make some innovative new algo using GPL software. If you try to distribute it to your customers you end up having to give away the "secret sauce". You'd have no business b/c anyone can just take your work and recompile it

So you only have two solutions:

1 - You run it on your own servers and just provide an API to the "cloud" (ie. what Facebook/Google do with the majority of their software) Then you don't have to share anything!

2 - You redo all the GPL ground work and work from the smaller pool of more permissively licensed software

So maybe that's why "cloud" solutions are so huge now? They can reap all the benefits of the GPL world and keep their competitive advantage. But my bigger concern is that there seem to be whole classes of software that can't be put into the cloud - and they're stuck making peanuts (providing "customer support" or whatever companies like RedHat do) or having to do a lot more work. Meanwhile the talent pool gets sucked up working in the cloud b/c it's easier money

I'm probably going to step on some toes here, but I have essentially the same concern when it comes to "getting rid of software patents". To me the net effect seems either everything just ends up getting hidden in the cloud or being economically unfeasible.

Re: Is the GPL Really Declining?

#169

Post by nkvoll »

erikbye wrote: post #99
josephg wrote: post #96

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Does it look like we're not working on it? Frankly, yes. I can't speak for the experience on linux, but on mac Inkscape needs to: - Support high dpi displays - It needs to scroll and zoom smoothly. (There's no reason for it to lag while scrolling and zooming on a modern computer. Every other app on my system manages it). - It needs to use the operating system's menubar instead of xquartz. - Use native controls for…

Ok. You are talking about problems with the software on a proprietary system... Sorry, I don't support closed platforms. These problems do not exist on the Linux version.

FWIW, HiDPI support does not work on Linux either. All icons, color palette, custom cursors are about half the size they should be on my 4k monitor.

Scrolling is pretty choppy and it doesn't support smooth/inertial scrolling.

So 3/5 of his listed issues exist on the Linux version.

Re: Is the GPL Really Declining?

#170

Post by pjmlp »

erikbye wrote: post #99
josephg wrote: post #96

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Does it look like we're not working on it? Frankly, yes. I can't speak for the experience on linux, but on mac Inkscape needs to: - Support high dpi displays - It needs to scroll and zoom smoothly. (There's no reason for it to lag while scrolling and zooming on a modern computer. Every other app on my system manages it). - It needs to use the operating system's menubar instead of xquartz. - Use native controls for…

Ok. You are talking about problems with the software on a proprietary system... Sorry, I don't support closed platforms. These problems do not exist on the Linux version.

This type of reaction is one of the reasons why everyone that cares about good UI/UX is on either OS X or Windows.
Post reply on HN