Hi,
On 07/09/16 09:26, stepharo wrote:
Le 7/9/16 à 08:53, Offray Vladimir Luna Cárdenas a écrit :
Hi,
Nice to see more diversity on license choice and projects in this
community. We have the permissive MIT license by default in almost
all Pharo and related project, but seeing GPL and AGPL in projects
like Spec and now Territorial increase the sense of choice and
engagement.
No sorry I cannot let you say such stupid statement.
Spec is not GPL.
Is not me who is doing the statement, is Benjamin Van Ryseghem, which
was pretty involved in its development, since 2014:
http://spec.st/license/gpl/mit/2014/08/15/Spec_change_license.html
And GPL is really dangerous for image based system. It is a plague.
We do not want to force nice people (the one that could follow a
license) to have to decide to use another language
just because they do not want to give their work for free.
Open source
Second you do not know what the mess it can be.
Yes, I don't know, but the Spec case shows that dual licensing is
possible, so is not a binary decision.
In my case as a freelancer, having such licenses as base for the code
of my works has helped me against big institutions that have
aggressive practices regarding "Intelectual Property" and want
everything for them all the time. Even in this community we have seen
some interesting work that can not be contributed back to the
community until the community makes something open by default
(something related Java support comes to mind).
You do not know the story behind. And all Moose is BSD and Pharo
ecosystem is MIT. So you can run away with them and get rich.
Now none of them force people to open source what they are doing
Or you can do the work twice, one close source and with legal bindings
for not releasing anything and the second time open source in a
community fashion.
Having a license that enforce reciprocity by default (GPL, AGPL)
instead of "do what you want" ones (MIT, BSD) helps to keep the
commons protected against predatory enclosure,
No it does not protect anything. It binds nice people to act nicely
but does not do anything against assholes. So this is a lose / lose
situation.
Well, in my context it has protected my against big institutions to
close my work. Same for CC-By-SA (which enforces reciprocity and is
behind most of the Pharo books). Licensing is a complex issue, it
doesn't work the same in all the contexts and products. I don't know the
specificity for image base development, but dual license is applicable
here, as the Spec case shows.
even if you're a small freelancer and the ones really interested in
such enclosure can still contact the author and pay the extra price
that comes with not reciprocity to the wider community.
You dream. Such license will not protect anyone.
There are millions companies out there using GPL code and not opening
their work.
Not anyone. See Cisco case [1]. So maybe there are millions companies
misbehaving about the license implications, but there are also companies
with millions behind that are in (forced?) compliance because the GPL
protection is working. This has implications in projects like guifi.net,
which is using Cisco GPLed routers to build one of the biggest p2p WiFi
networks in the world (35,464 nodes covering 58,383 kilometers) [1a].
[1]
http://arstechnica.com/information-technology/2009/05/cisco-settles-fsf-gpl-lawsuit-appoints-compliance-officer/
[1a] http://guifi.net/
Any code in GPL will not be considered for anything in our community.
Except for Spec and its dual license model.
My call is to consider differences. We should not have "The Pharo Way"
(TM) or "No way!"... suddenly Markus talk about feedback loops comes to
mind, particularly the slide on page 53, regarding "An open source
smalltalk ignoring all community contributions"[2]. This is far for
being the case in this community and we can keep that scenario at safe
distance, if we show options. So, dual license is an option, git is an
option, markdown is an option. Pharo as a place with options is one
where Pharo can fulfill its vision for more people. Let's make these
options visible and figure out the way the work better for a wider
community.
[2] http://marcusdenker.de/talks/16ESUG/FeedbackLoopsAnnotated.pdf
Cheers,
Offray
