KDBUS & Systemd Now Yields A Working System

[zester]

Since you start to act so high-impulsive and feel offended, does this mean that I hit the spot with my argumentation? Your "freedom" is not worth the penny, since you don't protect it. So there is no freedom at all, just public domain. Original BSD had nothing to protect in court, so they are okay with legally invalid license. Sure, my wording is way more stupid than yours above.

No your spreading fud and hate all things BSD. And apparently some pretty big names are publishing there software under a license you say isn't
legally valid. I think Disney, Sony, Nvidia ... would all disagree with you.

[zester]

Go on an listing toolkits, libraries, interfaces?
What value exactly do they play to end-user?
As I stated above many many times, LGPL is better for them due to many reasons, but Apache (or BSD) is still sufficient if its about public interface or public toolkit.

List me any non-library, non-framework, user-ready complete application that is a match to GPL equivalent like Blender, Gimp and so on.

Its a Software Development Framework, sooo thats kinda the point. You can build a simple cat program or a full blow operating system, without having to
worry about licensing conflicts.

[kraftman]

I have and they are.

Also grow up and protect your own freedom learn to program or do whatever instead of always relying on others to do the work for you. If you don't like closed source (Valve and there Games) then don't play them or make your own.

There's a difference between buying closed source software and letting them to take your code for free and give nothing back.

[zester]

Ok, that makes sense.
Yeah, it's a real shame they needed many, many years to replace GNU with bsd licensed code. What's more funny bsd is much older.

It is but Linux and Gnu had a couple years head start, while BSD devs had to deal with legal troubles to free that unix code.

[Teho]

I just filed and issue for kdbus, asking if it will be optional. A couple of other people asked greg on G+ but he didn't respond.
Ill find out and let everyone know.

Seriously? You couldn't figure out that by yourself? Then again I'm not suprised that you didn't do even the most basic research on the project before trashing it. It's a fairly self-contained kernel module that's easy to backport and it's obviously as optional as it gets... The dbus client libaries will also support both the old dbus protocol with dbus-daemon and kdbus.

[zester]

There's a difference between buying closed source software and letting them to take your code for free and give nothing back.

I am confused how are they taking code from me and not giving it back? There taking Disneys, AMD, Intels, Nvidias, Sonys .... code. I'm converting
all of those packages build scripts to premake, patching some software, and writing Lua bindings for everything.

[a user]

No your spreading fud and hate all things BSD. And apparently some pretty big names are publishing there software under a license you say isn't
legally valid. I think Disney, Sony, Nvidia ... would all disagree with you.

that companies are more BSD license affine does not make the bsd licens any better. i really do not know why you guys blow up this discussion so much with irrelevant stuff. it is quite simple: bsd license allows turning all the open source stuff into propriatary stuff, all its changes and additions.
GPL enforces to keep the changes to the used gpl based stuff open.

while both allow to be used as libraries together with propriatary stuff.

one must be drop dead stupid to think BSD-like licenses are the better from opensource software attitude point of view.

and the only reason why companies are prefering this one is because as long as there are alternatives with such licenses it is much simplier to uses them as they do not have to take care for nothing.

if you can't see the irony here you're blnde: open source has always suffered from absurd restrictions and trival patents that they couldn't fight against due to money and now "we" are giving them all hassle free and allowing them to enhance it without any kind of contribution giving back. it is like a slave begging for more pain.

i really don't get it...

[zester]

Seriously? You couldn't figure out that by yourself? Then again I'm not suprised that you didn't do even the most basic research on the project before trashing it. It's a fairly self-contained kernel module that's easy to backport and it's obviously as optional as it gets... The dbus client libaries will also support both the old dbus protocol with dbus-daemon and kdbus.

I was lead to believe it was going to tie into drivers and critical parts of the system. If I can -r then I don't care. But kdbus is useless to me.

[zester]

I get the feeling (a user, brosis, kraftman, Teho) are all the same user.

[a user]

I am confused how are they taking code from me and not giving it back? There taking Disneys, AMD, Intels, Nvidias, Sonys .... code. I'm converting

you should stop talking stupid things and instead start reading. it has been said many many times what he meants. see my post above for a very brief explenation.