🚀 go-pugleaf

In article <BtvKrK.2FM.2@cs.cmu.edu> tgl+@cs.cmu.edu (Tom Lane) writes:
>peter@global.hacktic.nl (Peter Busser) writes:
>> rahardj@ccu.umanitoba.ca (Budi Rahardjo) writes:
>> >peter@global.hacktic.nl (Peter Busser) writes:
>> >>Why would anyone need PD and not freeware?
>> 
>> >With PD, I can distribute the program and source as part of my own program
>> >without any problems. With freeware (most of the time) I still have to get 
>> >the permission from the author to distribute his/her program & source code.
>> 
>> You didn't read, I was explicitly talking about GNU software and software
>> with a GNU-ish copyleft, i.e. freeware. You don't need any permission to
>> distribute GNU(-ish) software either in source or binary form. The only
>> requirement is that you provide the changed sources to anyone who wants them
>> at a nominal cost.
>
>Peter, evidently *you* didn't read the GNU copyleft very carefully.
>
>If you use some GNU code in a program you write, the GNU General Public
>License effectively requires you to distribute the ENTIRE program under
>the GNU conditions.  In particular, you have to give away, for free,
                                                               ^^^^^^
>*your* source code as well as theirs.  (See their definition of "complete
>source code" if you don't believe me.)  And if someone else uses what
>you've done in a bigger program, they become subject to the GPL as well.

Well, please read the GPL again.  It does say that free software is not
necessarily `no-money' software.  In fact, you may charge money for a
program written with any part of a program that is under the GPL.  There
are several companies doing this.  One even sells the GNU C/C++ Compiler
for about $500.  Although, I would not buy it.  Of course, it is sort
of pointless to charge for a product since you *must* make the source
availible.

>Some people who object to this restriction refer to the GPL as the General
>Public Virus because of its self-replicating properties.

Heh.

>I have personally been involved in a free software project wherein we
>refrained from using any GNU code, simply because we wanted to use our
>distribution terms and not GNU's.
>
>There is a big difference between free software and PD software.
>For some purposes the difference does not matter; but claiming that
>it never matters merely shows your ignorance.
>				regards, tom lane

ttyl,

-- 
Eli Boaz                      | Line noise provide by S.W. Bell Telephone!
raistlin@wixer.cactus.org     | "Anyone not wearing 2 million sunblock is
...!cactus.org!wixer!raistlin |  going to have a REAL BAD DAY, get it?" -T2
----------------------------------------------------------------------------