Hello all ,
I will start in a bottom up manner
> Praveen Wrote
>
>I don't agree to your assessment at all. I think it is more to do with
>our cultural and economic situation, when you are worried about your
>own existence, it is hard for people to be thinking about giving back.
>
Every movement or an institution ought to have some synergy with the
socio-economic
aspects of the society which they are trying to cater to. For a country like
India , where
people struggle to live their daily life , why we should be adament about stuff
like
"freedom" ?
As computer software developers , we should focus on delivering products and
services
without worrying much about externalities. So , BSD/MIT/GPL are all same for
us.
"When you are not hungry , You can Think about Gandhi" - Anonymous
> Praveen Wrote
>yes, a lot and not just wondering I'm actively working to get more
>contributors from India.
>
Convince people about the wider incentive of contributing to the OSS projects ,
whether it is Free Software or not.
>> Praseed Wrote
>> Take the case of GNUCash. It is one of the best source code base available
>> out there. If some one adds
>> some India specific modules , they can sell it. Whenever , I have suggested
>> people to use that
>> as a platform , GPL license were found to be restrictive and constraining
>> for them.
> Praveen Wrote
>What is restricting them to add it?
Most pragmatic people who want to use these source code base are reluctant to
release the effort of their "sweat" (code ) to the public.
In Behavioral finance , it is called "Loss Aversion". Even if , we consume
millions
of lines of code , distributing 100 lines of code pains most people.
People who do distribute their code has got other strategic gains. An invidual
who sits in a remote corner do not find the threshhold energy for this
"altruism".
If it is optional to release the dervative , all people will jump in. Some will
release
it for strategic reason. No sane individual can tolerate others profiting out
of
his endeavors.
Even Stallman is jealous. If he is getting a re-birth , he will think twice
repeating
his stupidity.
>
>Are you saying taxing consulting work is bad?
>
I have seen taxation (here again Loss Aversion ) as a deterrent for lot of
people
to take up additional consulting work on top of their day job. ( It is
fallacious
but the attitude is prevalent ). Any one who feels like me on this ?
>> Praseed Wrote
>> Most Individuals prefer OSS licenses and corporations (paradoxically ) use
>> GPL. Those corporations
> Praveen wrote
>GPL is an OSS license approved by Open Source Initiative.
>
GPL has got one more clause than other OSS licenses. OSS , now a days include
even Pseudo open source licences from Microsoft.
What I meant was corporations prefer a license other than GPL !!!.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
I will tell you my encounter with FOSS. Last Year , I Open Sourced a
(toy ) Compiler (http://slangfordotnet.codeplex.com ) using MIT license. I did
some research on
the licensing model (back then). I chose MIT license after some thought
Here are my motivations
1) Writing a book on Compiler Construction (The source code contains a book
called
"Art of Compiler Construction in C# )
2) To show the project as a specimen of my skills in writing Interpreters ,
Compiler Backends and
.NET IL executable.
3) If possible, stuff should provide me some consulting assignment.
To achieve the above objective , I understood GPL is limiting. The third goal
won't be achieved
in my case , as the code base will be used only by indviduals or small
companies. I thought ,
If someone profits , let them. In retrospect, It was a nice decision.
The Project has been used as a base for some academic projects (which I am
aware of ) and
I have consulted for a japanese company and a German company to incorporate the
Compiler Backend in their proprietary products.
Their legal departments were interested in the project because it was having a
flexible model and
they can keep the derivative proprietary .
The spirit behind FOSS movement is not philosophy. It is self-interest.
regards
Praseed Pai
________________________________
From: Praveen A <[email protected]>
To: "This List discusses GNU/Linux & GNU, GPL Software"
<[email protected]>
Sent: Wednesday, November 9, 2011 7:06 AM
Subject: Re: [ILUG-Cochin.org] Ruby ditches GPL in favour of BSDL
2011/11/9 Praseed Pai <[email protected]>:
> Hello all ,
> I have always personally believed that the "fourth freedom" (
> compulsion [freedom?] to distribute the derivative ) is the
> root cause of all issues pertaining to GPL.
You are entitled to your opinion, but I differ with you here. But I
think you misunderstood GPL here. There is no compulsion to distribute
a derivative work, you can just keep the derivative work to yourselfe,
your company or organization. But if you distribute the binary you are
expected to give the source also because you received the source code
with the binary which is the sole reason why you could make a
derivative and we expect the person receiving the binary from you to
have the same freedoms as you have. How can your need for money
prevent the other person from enjoying the freedoms? After all you
enjoyed the freedoms yourself.
> Companies like RedHat,IBM and others who rely on GPLed code as a base for
> their infrastructure software
> might have motivation to give it back to the community as they are also
> benefiting from the base. In that way,
> GPL is doing a good social service by forcing these giants to give it back
> to the community. ( Debian project
> itself is reaction to the prominence of RH )
Debian project was started in 1993. Red Hat was not prominent then.
>
> What about small time development company or Individuals who use GPL code
> as their base. They
> will have reluctance to give the derivative work free as it might hamper
> their competitive edge in the
When someone release their software as GPL they are not doing it to
give competitive advantage to small time development company or
individuals but to give everyone freedom. Nobody is forcing anyone to
use GPLed code, if you don't like the terms don't use it.
> market. A corporation spends capital by contributing a developer or two to
> get mindshare of
> the free software enthusiasts and they are using Software base as a
> mechanism to speed up the
> time to Market.
Authors who release code under GPL is not interested in this, if you
want this release your work under BSD or similar licenses.
> Most small time developers ( other than some occasional exceptions ) never
> bother to use GPL source
> code as their base. It is like fear of taxation which prevents an individual
> to take additional consulting
> work on top of his job. ( I have seen this phenomena a lot )
Are you saying taxing consulting work is bad?
> Take the case of GNUCash. It is one of the best source code base available
> out there. If some one adds
> some India specific modules , they can sell it. Whenever , I have suggested
> people to use that
> as a platform , GPL license were found to be restrictive and constraining
> for them.
What is restricting them to add it?
> Most Individuals prefer OSS licenses and corporations (paradoxically ) use
> GPL. Those corporations
GPL is an OSS license approved by Open Source Initiative.
> use GPL as a deterent against their competitors. If you use GPL , your
> competitors are also forced to
> distribute the derivative.
Why would you give your competitor a blank check? Your competitor is
getting benefited from your work, it is not charity.
> All the people in the world not willing to pay interest to Stallman's ego
> by subscribing to GPL.
That is fine, but it is still the most popular Free Software license
in the world, so clearly many people disagree with your view and have
a higher respect for the views of Stallman.
> Have you ever wondered why we Indians are not part of Free Software
> movement as contributors ?
yes, a lot and not just wondering I'm actively working to get more
contributors from India.
> Even the people who advocate Free Software has got reluctance to share their
> work. So, they never
> bother to make the first step.
I don't agree to your assessment at all. I think it is more to do with
our cultural and economic situation, when you are worried about your
own existence, it is hard for people to be thinking about giving back.
Praveen
--
പ്രവീണ് അരിമ്പ്രത്തൊടിയില്
You have to keep reminding your government that you don't get your
rights from them; you give them permission to rule, only so long as
they follow the rules: laws and constitution.
_______________________________________________
Indian Libre User Group Cochin Mailing List
http://www.ilug-cochin.org/mailing-list/
http://mail.ilug-cochin.org/mailman/listinfo/mailinglist_ilug-cochin.org
#[email protected]
_______________________________________________
Indian Libre User Group Cochin Mailing List
http://www.ilug-cochin.org/mailing-list/
http://mail.ilug-cochin.org/mailman/listinfo/mailinglist_ilug-cochin.org
#[email protected]
