Originally posted by Space Heater
View Post
Announcement
Collapse
No announcement yet.
Netgate Announces pfSense Plus With Greater Divergence From pfSense
Collapse
X
-
Originally posted by trasz View PostNo, quite the opposite - you might be a GNU zealot due to saying, quote, "code licensed under the GPL forced them to provide their sources". So, no, it didn't force them, as explained above.
Comment
-
Originally posted by Space Heater View PostYes code licensed under the GPL does force them to provide changes, the fact that they are willing (or not) doesn't change that fact. The original premise was that if they chose to use the GPL would they have to give back changes, and the answer is that they clearly would. It's too bad you can't follow basic arguments and resort to name calling.
Comment
-
Originally posted by trasz View PostNo - code licensed under GPL prevents them from using it when they don't intend to immediately share all their changes. See explanation above.
Comment
-
It's pointless trying to reason with ideological fanatics.
Do you even realize that entire question of whether some company is being able to use some code or not for its proprietary products, whether its good or bad etc. can be logically reduced to simple ethics.
YOU see things solely with YOUR particular set of moral values (or their lack) in mind: "stealing is bad". OR alternatively: ME? I had nothing to do with developing that code but, Hell, I dont want nobody to profit from it.
That's the whole basic question GPL and BSD arguments can be reduced to. GPL fans have one set of values, BSD fans have their own set of values.
Whole problem for me is, GPL fans try to impose their views and preferences to ME with aggressive propaganda and hate campaigns.
Comment
-
Originally posted by Space Heater View PostThe fact you think I dislike permissive licenses, or that I'm a GPL fanatic shows you have zero reading comprehension.
My INITIAL POST
Originally posted by M1kkko View PostAnd this, ladies and gentlemen, is why we need the GPL license.
Show me the sources for Mikrotik router's firmware..
Its based on Linux.
You CAN find sources for RouterOS GPL bits but without the rest of it, they might as well not be.
Particular vendor used GPL software, created his proprietary layer around it and it's all there is to it. You still have zero clue whats going inside that proprietary part. That "opened" portion will not help you any in seeing into "black box".
If you dont know what "effective difference" means in this context, well, it's your personal shortcoming, not mine.
Comment
-
Originally posted by aht0 View PostNo, it's you lacking any reading comprehension.
Originally posted by aht0 View PostYou GPL fans bitch and rant and sneer about "open source" or "proprietary vendors abusing BSD without giving anything back".
Originally posted by aht0 View PostI brought you single example where there is no EFFECTIVE difference to vendor using linux same way and the sources it is forced to give back are still making very little difference if any. And you go off the rails trying to prove hell knows what.
Originally posted by aht0 View PostIf you dont know what "effective difference" means in this context, well, it's your personal shortcoming, not mine.
Comment
-
Originally posted by Space Heater View PostYes, and I explained that the GPL would make a difference, which is why they decided to not use the GPL.
Comment
-
Originally posted by trasz View Post
Simply skimming a few posts above quickly shows this is... not particularly close to truth. You've been explained why it wouldn't make any difference (tl;dr you got the cause and result backwards).
Comment
Comment