Subject:
Re: GNU LIB for PIC
From:
####@####.#### (Byron A Jeff)
Date:
13 Jul 2002 04:20:28 -0000
Message-Id: <200207130407.g6D47av07710@cleon.cc.gatech.edu>
>
>
> As I wade in on holy territory ...
Yes. Yes you do.
> I might humbly suggest the BSD license
> -- no restrictions, no glitches, no politics, no Stallman! The best of
> all possible worlds -- IMHO.
Which of course I have some disagreement with. While RMS does have the fire
of a zealot, which makes him somewhat unpalatable, his philosophy is sound:
When it comes to Open Source Software, the rights of the end user superceeds
the rights of distributors and modifiers. These two groups tend to try to
create markets by artifically creating scarcity. But it's done at the expense
of the end user and often of the original developer, who is also a end user.
See any license where an author has to pay for an upgraded binary which has
their own code, and cannot get access to changes in their own code... needs
restrictions, has glitches, and requires some political activism.
I wouldn't count Stallman out, because IMHO the GPL/LGPL combo is closer to
that best of all possible worlds than BSD.
I promise I won't add any more to the discussion.
BAJ
>
> Cheers,
> Rob
>
>
> On Fri, 12 Jul 2002, Bas Wijnen wrote:
>
> > Hi,
> >
> > The idea sounds good, but if I were you, I would read some more about
> > licensing, especially LGPL vs GPL:
> > http://www.fsf.org/licenses/why-not-lgpl.html. The free software
> > foundation explicitly states, that usually the GPL is better, also for
> > libraries. The idea of LGPL is that the restriction the GPL poses, namely
> > that no non-GPL'd code may link to it, is not in the interest of creating
> > a world where everybody uses free software. This is true for libc, since
> > people will use a different lib with such a license. If you build
> > something original, they cannot since there is no other lib doing the same
> > thing. In that case, the GPL is more approriate, because people may
> > license their software as free (GPL) software in order to use the lib.
> >
> > This argument builds heavily on the idea that free software is Good and
> > non-free software is Bad. If you are not convinced about that, please
> > read the philosofy section on the free software foundation's page:
> > http://www.fsf.org/philosophy/philosophy.html
> >
> > Bye,
> > Bas Wijnen
> >
> > --
> > /** mastermind. input 4 numbers 0-5. output <right>.<in the right place> **/
> >
> > main(){int c[4] ,x=3 ,l=getpid() ,i;; for( srand(l);c[ x]=- rand
> > ()%6 ,x-- ;);; for( ;44> x;){ char a[9] ,*p=
> > "%.1f\n", b[9];x=i=0; gets(a);for (l=4 ;l-- ;)x+=-(a[l] -=48)==
> > (b[l ]=c[ l]); ;for (l=0;16 >i;l =++i %4)x
> > +=(b[i/4]+ a[l] ?0:( a[l]=b[i/4] =10)) ;printf(p,x *.1) ;};}
> >
> >
> > ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> > To unsubscribe, e-mail: ####@####.####
> > For additional commands, e-mail: ####@####.####
> >
> >
>
> -=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=--=-=-=-=
> Robert S. Sciuk http://www.controlq.com 259 Simcoe St. S.
> Control-Q Research tel: 905.576.8028 Oshawa, Ont.
> ####@####.#### fax: 905.576.8386 Canada, L1H 4H3
>
>
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> To unsubscribe, e-mail: ####@####.####
> For additional commands, e-mail: ####@####.####
>
