Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

FreeBSD Ends 2022 Short Of Fundraising Goal But Continues Driving New Features

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • mdedetrich
    replied
    The hilariously ironic thing about this whole hur dur "The reason why the BSD's aren't that successful is because of their non GPL license" is that it also completely ignores the disconnect licenses can have between their theoretical benefits and reality.

    Want a good example of this? Have a look at how Linux turned out with Android. Companies who didn't conform to the GPL mentality found ways around it and right now 90%+ of the phones that you buy you don't even have control over because the bootloader is locked, and because of this Android itself is as locked as Windows is (some would say ironically moreso because of the bootloader).

    The real reason behind the BSD's not being as popular is largely historical and not relevant to the license. From what I gather there seem to be 2 critical reasons behind this

    1. There was a lawsuit in the 90's pushed by unix (apparently also supported by Microsoft behind the scenes) which the BSD's were caught up in. This really didn't help their adoption, because people avoided the BSD's like the plague in what was a very critical time.
    2. BSD's had a different attitude when it came to contributions. In the past from what I know, BSD's were a lot more strict when it came to accepting code contributions. They only wanted high quality code/contributions and this significantly reduce how many contributors they had. This strategy actually worked up until roughly a decade ago, i.e. one of the main reasons why Netflix picked FreeBSD over Linux for their streaming caching servers was that Linux's net stack was trash at the time (note this has been resolved since). However once you get to a critical amount of contributors, even if code is contributed thats not perfect someone else will find the problem which is the state at which Linux is now.

    This is ironically the problem with the various BSD's. (moreso the popular ones), its actually more reliant on companies open source contributors then a lot of small time contributors.

    Leave a comment:


  • ll1025
    replied
    ITT: FOSS advocates upset that others are using their intentionally free, no-strings-attached code without paying money or feeling obligated to repay the favor.

    If the FreeBSD folks wanted to ensure that they got paid, that starts to sound like the sorts of proprietary licenses that arent too popular around here.

    Leave a comment:


  • BingoNightly
    replied
    Originally posted by ryao View Post

    People do it mostly because they do not want to maintain forks, and the desire to avoid the pain of maintaining forks is independent of the license.
    Exactly, technical debt is more expensive than many realize.

    Leave a comment:


  • ryao
    replied
    Originally posted by Estranged1906 View Post

    You have no entitlement to money if someone takes your GPL code but at least you get to see and use the code that Apple/Sony/Netflix write.
    You picked some very bad examples. Apple releases a fair amount of their code in the form of code drops:



    They are also doing a ton of work on shared components like LLVM and WebKit. They also funded CUPS development single handedly until the CUPS developer decided to leave his guaranteed lifetime employment at Apple.

    Sony is well known for keeping their contributions low key:



    Netflix is a well known contributor to FreeBSD:



    That said, you are not entitled to see changes companies made to GPL code unless they ship it to you in a product and you request the source code. Most of the time, only masochists will want to see the code, since it is often hacks rather than good upstreamable fixes. Getting code drops like these is rarely ever beneficial. Even Linus Torvalds will readily admit that code from code drops is largely useless.

    Originally posted by Estranged1906 View Post
    Or even better, the companies submit their code directly to the upstream (you).
    This can happen under any OSS license. There is nothing in the GPL that makes this more or less likely than it is with any OSS license.

    Originally posted by Estranged1906 View Post
    With a BSD license you get absolutely nothing back.
    You get about as much back with a BSD license as Linus Torvalds gets back with the GPL. He is not interested in code dumps, so the GPL gives him nothing that a BSD license would not. The only code he wants is good quality code that takes into account his feedback and has people maintaining it. Nothing in either license requires this. People do it mostly because they do not want to maintain forks, and the desire to avoid the pain of maintaining forks is independent of the license. Thus, the BSD license is just as good at receiving code back as the GPL.
    Last edited by ryao; 26 January 2023, 03:46 PM.

    Leave a comment:


  • kpedersen
    replied
    Originally posted by BingoNightly View Post

    They got over $1M
    Indeed. They are better funded than most popular Linux distros.

    OpenBSD is quite impressive too: https://www.openbsdfoundation.org/contributors.html

    Though some of this (i.e from Microsoft) is for OpenSSH and other projects that underpin the industry.

    Still very cool to see John Carmack contributed financially (and a large amount!), including the terminal rendering improvements a while back.
    Last edited by kpedersen; 26 January 2023, 03:24 PM.

    Leave a comment:


  • mdedetrich
    replied
    Originally posted by andre30correia View Post
    the problem of mit license, apple/sony and others take the code and they can't even give a dolar for the devs
    Try again, they are some of the heaviest contributors back to the FreeBSD, so is netflix. Also Apple publishes their OS sources online (see https://opensource.apple.com/releases/), its their userspace programs which are proprietary but thats no different to Linux.

    This MIT fud needs to stop, there may be reasons why FreeBSD isn't as popular as Linux but there is scant evidence its due to its license.



    Originally posted by Estranged1906 View Post

    You have no entitlement to money if someone takes your GPL code but at least you get to see and use the code that Apple/Sony/Netflix write. Or even better, the companies submit their code directly to the upstream (you). With a BSD license you get absolutely nothing back.
    Have you looked at https://opensource.apple.com/releases/ ? Apple publishes their sources, its just userspace apps which are closed and that aint no different to Linux

    Leave a comment:


  • BingoNightly
    replied
    Originally posted by andre30correia View Post
    the problem of mit license, apple/sony and others take the code and they can't even give a dolar for the devs
    They got over $1M

    Leave a comment:


  • Estranged1906
    replied
    Originally posted by ryao View Post

    No open source license exists that addresses this. Even the GPL does not do a thing about it. The beauty of open source is that it enables others to build on what you did, which pushes technology forward. Money is secondary to that.
    You have no entitlement to money if someone takes your GPL code but at least you get to see and use the code that Apple/Sony/Netflix write. Or even better, the companies submit their code directly to the upstream (you). With a BSD license you get absolutely nothing back.

    Leave a comment:


  • ryao
    replied
    Originally posted by andre30correia View Post
    the problem of mit license, apple/sony and others take the code and they can't even give a dolar for the devs
    No open source license exists that addresses this. Even the GPL does not do a thing about it. The beauty of open source is that it enables others to build on what you did, which pushes technology forward. Money is secondary to that.

    I have done years of OSS development for which I have never been paid. Large businesses use my work, including Amazon. I am happy to see that. If I did not want to see that, I would not have done OSS development in the first place.
    Last edited by ryao; 26 January 2023, 12:21 PM.

    Leave a comment:


  • RejectModernity
    replied
    Originally posted by andre30correia View Post
    the problem of mit license, apple/sony and others take the code and they can't even give a dolar for the devs
    Whoa, hold on for a second cowboy. Apple Donated 1,000–$4,999 in year 2021-2022. That's pretty generous, it's like 1-5 iphones or something.

    Leave a comment:

Working...
X