Date: Tue, 19 Sep 2000 12:46:46 -0600 From: Brett Glass <brett@lariat.org> To: j mckitrick <jcm@freebsd-uk.eu.org> Cc: chat@FreeBSD.ORG Subject: Re: new license idea? Message-ID: <4.3.2.7.2.20000919124101.05089eb0@localhost> In-Reply-To: <20000919175403.B71735@dogma.freebsd-uk.eu.org> References: <4.3.2.7.2.20000919104443.00bf44b0@localhost> <20000919160157.A70731@dogma.freebsd-uk.eu.org> <4.3.2.7.2.20000919104443.00bf44b0@localhost>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
At 10:54 AM 9/19/2000, j mckitrick wrote: >What about the fragmentation issue? >Someone takes my code, reuses it, keeps the changes, and has created a new, >incompatible version? Fragmentation can and does occur regardless of licensing. XEmacs is a good example. However, fragmentation/forking does not mean that standards will not be followed or that compatibility will not be maintained. At the February LinuxWorld, Linus Torvalds said that he actually thought that a bit of fragmentation -- in the form of specialization -- would be good for Linux. Ironically, this is exactly what has happened with the BSDs, and we now have five and a half very good OSes. (I count PicoBSD as a half, because it is small and derived from the FreeBSD source tree.) Fragmentation/forking can be as much a sign of creativity and progress as a problem. It is only problematic when it is used by a large company (e.g. Microsoft) as a bludgeon. Or when it breaks compatibility and there's not appropriate backward compatibility. --Brett To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-chat" in the body of the message
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?4.3.2.7.2.20000919124101.05089eb0>