Re: [cdesktopenv-devel] Moving to MIT license

Sun, 17 Jun 2018 08:14:35 -0700


Exactly. This is the problem. One says "allow me so I can improve the project" and
after you allow s/he says "I will not contribute back".

This was why I mentioned Apple. Is it true of false that Apple used BSD to build
their Os? Is it true or false that they made billions of dollars with the help of it?
Is it true or false that the BSD community asked Apple to donate a few icons
for their desktop, as a "thank you", and Apple refused?

This is the information I read on sites such as linuxtoday.com at that time.
If false, OK. I will not trust linuxtoday again and forget what follows.

For me what Apple did was OK with the license, but if they indeed refused
to donate a few desktop icons back to the project then I find this
a strongly unethical attitude allowed by the license.

I am not a developer of CDE. Developers will decide what they want to do
in the future. I just express my opinion since Jon asked about opinions.

Antonis.



Στις 16/06/2018 10:20 μμ, ο Chase έγραψε:
I can see both sides of the argument, although I must say that permissive licenses rarely see corporate users contribute back their code, Andrew tanenbaum, creator of Minix, received a letter from an employee of intel stating how intel preferred permissively licensed software to copyleft software as they wouldn't have to give their contributions to their competitors, which meant they were able to use Minix in the intel management engine without contributing code back to Minix. Although, I also think that the market CDE was created for, workstations, is long dead and gone, and thus any meaningful corporate contributions to CDE with it. I say we simply stick with LGPL, motif hasn't moved yet, the xutils havent moved, so that is going to be a lot of work for what seems to be very little reward.

Also, as far as I can tell (I am not a lawyer), the EPL is only incompatible with the GPL, not the LGPL, so we could probably still see an updated kornshell in CDE. I would however like to see the assets bumped to CC-BY-SA-4.0 still.

Thank you for your time,
-Chase


‐‐‐‐‐‐‐ Original Message ‐‐‐‐‐‐‐
On June 14, 2018 5:27 AM, Antonis Tsolomitis <antonis.tsolomi...@gmail.com> wrote:



On 14/06/2018 12:55 μμ, Matthew R. Trower wrote:
You seem to hold developers in low regard. Please consider: what happens to a project with no developers?

Of course not. I have developed many things in the TeX world and of course I am grateful to
Jon and others who worked hard to free CDE and make it work.

So on the contrary, I am grateful to developers. I am just afraid that a wrong turn will
hurt again CDE. That is all.

And what about users? I have proof for the other direction. I have paid for CDE and
as a user I was treated with disrespect.*

Someone must think of the users too. Not only the developers.

Antonis.


*The only useful thing about that buy was the book it came with the CD which I now use
with the LGPL CDE.


------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Check out the vibrant tech community on one of the world's most
engaging tech sites, Slashdot.org! http://sdm.link/slashdot
_______________________________________________
cdesktopenv-devel mailing list
cdesktopenv-devel@lists.sourceforge.net
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/cdesktopenv-devel

Reply via email to