Comments on: Why Mono/Gtk+/glib? http://zbowling.com/blog/2005/04/04/why-monogtkglib/ Human Code Generator Fri, 08 Aug 2008 00:24:55 +0000 http://wordpress.org/?v=2.6 By: Danny Milosavljevic http://zbowling.com/blog/2005/04/04/why-monogtkglib/#comment-890 Danny Milosavljevic Tue, 02 May 2006 19:38:50 +0000 http://zacbowling.com/archives/2005/04/04/why-monogtkglib/#comment-890 Hah, here I'm writing a comment after a year of inactivity. Probably vanishes in a black hole. Finn: You said 'But can you stop (evil) companies or individuals from “looking at” GPL-ed source code, and use it for “inspiration” when creating theire own closed-source-monster-software?' Well, let them look, let them copy, whatever. They'll be busy copying and we will we waay ahead once they are done. >Another thing, who sues on GPL-s behalf anyway? "On GPL's behalf"? GPL is no legal entity, if you write GPLed software and someone tries to take away your freedom, you have to defend yourself. However, if you transmit ownership to the FSF, the FSF will defend it. Around here, old-style companies are reeeeeally careful whether to use GPLed packages in their non-GPL-compatible products. And bad publicity like that could kill one commercially very fast. Hah, here I’m writing a comment after a year of inactivity. Probably vanishes in a black hole.

Finn:
You said ‘But can you stop (evil) companies or individuals from “looking at” GPL-ed source code, and use it for “inspiration” when creating theire own closed-source-monster-software?’

Well, let them look, let them copy, whatever. They’ll be busy copying and we will we waay ahead once they are done.

>Another thing, who sues on GPL-s behalf anyway?

“On GPL’s behalf”? GPL is no legal entity, if you write GPLed software and someone tries to take away your freedom, you have to defend yourself.
However, if you transmit ownership to the FSF, the FSF will defend it.

Around here, old-style companies are reeeeeally careful whether to use GPLed packages in their non-GPL-compatible products.

And bad publicity like that could kill one commercially very fast.

]]> By: Finn http://zbowling.com/blog/2005/04/04/why-monogtkglib/#comment-197 Finn Wed, 06 Apr 2005 00:17:28 +0000 http://zacbowling.com/archives/2005/04/04/why-monogtkglib/#comment-197 ops. mixup, should be: "GPL only seems less copy/past-able than BSD to me". ops. mixup, should be: “GPL only seems less copy/past-able than BSD to me”.

]]> By: bjoern http://zbowling.com/blog/2005/04/04/why-monogtkglib/#comment-196 bjoern Tue, 05 Apr 2005 15:19:55 +0000 http://zacbowling.com/archives/2005/04/04/why-monogtkglib/#comment-196 >but I was more refering to QT then anything else. QT is ether buy it or go full GPL. i think Qt is a different think. Qt is the only C++ GUI Toolkit and even more (a complete C++ framework) which runs native on mostly every platform. I think this is a point were you can get a benefit out of it, either money or even better Free Software. Also compare with: http://www.gnu.org/licenses/why-not-lgpl.html On Gtk+ general and Gtk# and mono specifically, it's a great Tookit for the Unix platform and has some cross-platform features but it don't always looks 100% natively on windows and don't run on MacOS without x-window. Also Gtk# has some competitors with windows.forms or java and there GUI Tookits. So there the GPL would be a disadvantage and would lead people to non-free Software, therefore i think here the LGPL is a perfect solution. But i wouldn't say the LGPL is always the best solution for libs. If the lib is something special which has no non-free competition, i think it's a good idea to use the GPL so that everyone can get something in return. >but I was more refering to QT then anything else. QT is ether buy it or go full GPL.

i think Qt is a different think.
Qt is the only C++ GUI Toolkit and even more (a complete C++ framework) which runs native on mostly every platform.

I think this is a point were you can get a benefit out of it, either money or even better Free Software. Also compare with: http://www.gnu.org/licenses/why-not-lgpl.html

On Gtk+ general and Gtk# and mono specifically, it’s a great Tookit for the Unix platform and has some cross-platform features but it don’t always looks 100% natively on windows and don’t run on MacOS without x-window. Also Gtk# has some competitors with windows.forms or java and there GUI Tookits.
So there the GPL would be a disadvantage and would lead people to non-free Software, therefore i think here the LGPL is a perfect solution.
But i wouldn’t say the LGPL is always the best solution for libs. If the lib is something special which has no non-free competition, i think it’s a good idea to use the GPL so that everyone can get something in return.

]]> By: zbowling http://zbowling.com/blog/2005/04/04/why-monogtkglib/#comment-195 zbowling Mon, 04 Apr 2005 16:25:02 +0000 http://zacbowling.com/archives/2005/04/04/why-monogtkglib/#comment-195 Its very true we need GPL for applications, but I was more refering to QT then anything else. QT is ether buy it or go full GPL. I don't believe in something like that not being LGPL. Its very true we need GPL for applications, but I was more refering to QT then anything else. QT is ether buy it or go full GPL. I don’t believe in something like that not being LGPL.

]]> By: Finn http://zbowling.com/blog/2005/04/04/why-monogtkglib/#comment-194 Finn Mon, 04 Apr 2005 15:41:58 +0000 http://zacbowling.com/archives/2005/04/04/why-monogtkglib/#comment-194 But can you stop (evil) companies or individuals from "looking at" GPL-ed source code, and use it for "inspiration" when creating theire own closed-source-monster-software? BSD only seems less Copy/Past-able than GPL to me. All it takes, is a little bit work to make the code look a bit different, as I see it. Another thing, who sues on GPL-s behalf anyway? But can you stop (evil) companies or individuals from “looking at” GPL-ed source code, and use it for “inspiration” when creating theire own closed-source-monster-software? BSD only seems less Copy/Past-able than GPL to me. All it takes, is a little bit work to make the code look a bit different, as I see it.
Another thing, who sues on GPL-s behalf anyway?

]]> By: Joris Willems http://zbowling.com/blog/2005/04/04/why-monogtkglib/#comment-193 Joris Willems Mon, 04 Apr 2005 14:22:29 +0000 http://zacbowling.com/archives/2005/04/04/why-monogtkglib/#comment-193 I think Microsoft benefits the most from BSD licenced software. They can use the fruits of open source to enforce there monopoly on a lot of end-user software. They are already using BSD software and can even keep it quiet. Open source needs a protection like the GPL in order to give the public the fruits. I think everyone can benefit from certain software beeing licenced under BSD licence but in general the public and the open source movement needs a GPL style licence for the majority of it works. I think Microsoft benefits the most from BSD licenced software. They can use the fruits of open source to enforce there monopoly on a lot of end-user software. They are already using BSD software and can even keep it quiet.
Open source needs a protection like the GPL in order to give the public the fruits. I think everyone can benefit from certain software beeing licenced under BSD licence but in general the public and the open source movement needs a GPL style licence for the majority of it works.

]]>