Other Directory Sites: SeekWonder | Directory Owners Forum
The following archive was created by hippie-mail 7.98617-22 on Sat Apr 10 1999 - 01:14:01
Eric Young (eay@cryptsoft.com)
Tue, 29 Sep 1998 02:24:17 +1000 (EST)
On Mon, 28 Sep 1998, Adam Shostack wrote:
> | If one is interested to encourage people to include crypto in their
> | applications, GNU style licenses are a step in the wrong direction.
>
> I wholeheartedly agree. Theres a number of packages out there I'd
> love to be able to use in products I'm building. Code re-use,
> customers not having to worry about what libraries we're using, and
> convincing management to free some of the stuff we're doing, are all
> good arguments in favor. The contamination bits of the GPL utterly
> prevent us from doing this. BSD, PD, or Artistic licenses are far
> preferable.
:-) A certain person I work closely with likes to call it a virus.
Once a package is infected by some GPL code, it takes over the whole package
(according to the licence).
I've seen some people in the GNU camp argue that the BSD type licence gets
ugly because of all the 'includes code from xyz' type messages, but my
experiance is that comercial people can overcome this, but not the GPL.
I changed from the GPL quite some time ago, primarily because I was getting
sick of email from people wanting to use a library of mine but their legal
people were going into spasms because of the full implications of the GPL.
eric
The following archive was created by hippie-mail 7.98617-22 on Sat Apr 10 1999 - 01:14:01