[EMAIL PROTECTED] ("Andrej Ricnik-Bay") writes:
> On 01/02/2008, Tony Caduto <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>> The part about the BSD license is bogus. A BSD license is the most
>> desirable of any Open Source license and gives you the right to use
>> PostgreSQL in your commercial apps without worry.> While I'm a big fan of the BSD license (for varied reasons) I think that > OpenSource hardliners like RMS would argue that the BSD license is *NOT* > in the true spirit of OpenSource *BECAUSE* of what you list as a bonus > of it ... the locking down of benefits reaped from OpenSource not getting > back into the stream. RMS wouldn't argue that, because he is uninterested in "OpenSource." That's a term created/popularized by Eric Raymond, who is no friend of RMS. RMS is interested in "free software," and considers various "BSD-related" licenses to be reasonable choices for free software. <http://www.gnu.org/philosophy/license-list.html> He'd prefer that people use the GPL, but I don't think there's anything overly "hard line" about the notion of the author of a license preferring it to others. It would seem mighty odd if he said something like "I wrote the GPL, but think you should use the <Foo License> instead." -- "cbbrowne","@","cbbrowne.com" http://cbbrowne.com/info/linuxxian.html Jumping off a cliff doesn't kill you! It's only when you hit the ground... ---------------------------(end of broadcast)--------------------------- TIP 1: if posting/reading through Usenet, please send an appropriate subscribe-nomail command to [EMAIL PROTECTED] so that your message can get through to the mailing list cleanly
