Date: Sat, 18 Apr 2020 13:08:44 -0400 From: Aryeh Friedman <aryeh.friedman@gmail.com> To: Ralf Mardorf <ralf.mardorf@rocketmail.com> Cc: FreeBSD Mailing List <freebsd-questions@freebsd.org> Subject: Re: freebsd should be rewritten based on microkernel architecture Message-ID: <CAGBxaXnJoNmZVON9Hfi6P=a=KQveSPvnBmp5zYALM3d28tncXQ@mail.gmail.com> In-Reply-To: <20200418182437.037869c8@archlinux> References: <3f1496d1f598c84b3871b630f161256e152aca75.camel@tom.com> <CAGBxaXmvde89R%2BREcup9PEV6SAzQAitwHn9og92uz51GYpu%2B%2BQ@mail.gmail.com> <CAEJNuHwewpssL-t49D9pLYWNqYqwAzx4bE2eQdtow05=E9UY5Q@mail.gmail.com> <CAGBxaXmvaNtiFZiza_fGrHzWAcMp64d_NWstwvvVvQ959oGWHQ@mail.gmail.com> <681077991.2278153.1587146552233@mail.yahoo.com> <CAGBxaXkMQf9Gs2bujJZjR0Gcv3nyig_FgcGc8m8282fB8_e_Xg@mail.gmail.com> <20200417213025.16ba5877.freebsd@edvax.de> <1659102270.119843446.1587168373188.JavaMail.zimbra@shaw.ca> <CAGBxaXnNMchVfrVXDkNyBuO0YiQ2%2BJm0cefu6A80YgroPTnwLQ@mail.gmail.com> <20200418092801.20d10f5b@archlinux> <CAGBxaX=4=yx-xSo0gdsVgAoA7fUn8oRq3173covquHNw61kBJQ@mail.gmail.com> <4bc4b613-50a7-4890-61e8-5ed5037b07dc@kicp.uchicago.edu> <CAGBxaXntGMioFkp3xqq9CWSBA_vh=rNcJE5zZEkGafRA4N5kTQ@mail.gmail.com> <20200418165853.79dbdde1@archlinux> <CAGBxaX=VMh0RUAZjDDJak1Tb7YX5k5ZtMumgRrufv7EMwUpy=w@mail.gmail.com> <20200418182437.037869c8@archlinux>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On Sat, Apr 18, 2020 at 12:24 PM Ralf Mardorf via freebsd-questions < freebsd-questions@freebsd.org> wrote: > On Sat, 18 Apr 2020 11:26:54 -0400, Aryeh Friedman wrote: > >> On Fri, 17 Apr 2020 20:50:09 -0400, Aryeh Friedman wrote: > >> >And here goes the *ABSOLUTE* reason why no developer who ever hopes > >> >to make any money at all from their work should *EVER* use GPL. > >> > >> It's utter nonsense! Without doubts MIT, BSD and other licenses are > >> better for some projects, while for other projects GPL could grant a > >> bonus. > > > >Not according to the FreeBSD foundation who recommends against GPL in > >almost all cases. > > > https://www.freebsd.org/doc/en_US.ISO8859-1/articles/bsdl-gpl/article.html > >(see sections 9 and 10) > > They do not use the terms "absolute" and "ever". > Maybe since English is not your native language then some of the subtle context is lost but to a native speaker they say just that but much subtler way (but is unmistakable what their preference is) while recognizing for historical reasons some stuff has to stay GPL. See the -hackers@ and -current@ lists if you want to see a huge amount of effort to remove as much GPL code in the base system as possible. > > Btw. if there are already a lot of GPL licensed libraries and kernel > abilities available for a project of some domain, that are not > available by such an amount, if at all by another licensed > infrastructure, it could become very expensive to create the required > infrastructure. > That's one reason why the ports collection exists to cleanly divorce the stuff that is hard to remove GPL from what is critical to the core of the OS. Also /usr/src/contrib is where all stuff that cannot cleanly be used under BSD goes to make it clear it is legally separate then the rest of the base system (legally no different than RH or any other Linux dist does when they combine many works from different licenses into a packaged OS). > Those who make a living from whatever licensed software probably have > reasons to chose a particular license. Some probably chose the wrong > license by mistake, other chose a license that is good for them and > their customers. > Some of them are forced to pick the wrong license due to the libraries that are required for their work (this is my #1 objection to GPL). This is the main reason I am so ardent in calling GPL "evil". > I can't see that you are that successful with your business, as the > coder of Ardour is with his business. That might be a wrong conclusion, > let alone that the software license not necessarily is the reason for > more or less success. However, you are seemingly not programming in all > domains, but you don't restrain from generalizing. > 1. Do some research before drawing conclusions if you did you would see over the 30 years of my career I have worked in many different domains of software development. 2. Since almost all my current work is covered by NDA's forced on me by clients (I would prefer not to have them) there is no way you can judge or not judge how successful I am 3. Are you a developer? If not, you likely don't understand the economics of software development as well as you think you do According to the Wikipedia article on Ardour, it's primary author was hired by a hardware company to work full time on Ardour. This is consistent with the claim I have made throughout the entire thread that it is impossible to work on GPL'ed projects and make a living unless your are subsidized by some organization whose primary business is not the software but complements the software. For example hardware companies love open-source because it makes their hardware more useful to their customers (they are not software companies). This does not translate to a software only company, for self evident reasons, nor to a company that requires one-off custom software for its primary business (such as many medical applications). If you want to pick a better example of a successful open source project that makes money I would say you should go with firefox (which is successful, via donations, due to overwhelming critical mass not because people would buy it if it was commercial) > _______________________________________________ > freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list > https://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions > To unsubscribe, send any mail to " > freebsd-questions-unsubscribe@freebsd.org" > -- Aryeh M. Friedman, Lead Developer, http://www.PetiteCloud.org
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?CAGBxaXnJoNmZVON9Hfi6P=a=KQveSPvnBmp5zYALM3d28tncXQ>