🚀 go-pugleaf

In article <1992Feb11.012148.17203@uunet.uu.net> kyle@uunet.uu.net (Kyle Jones) writes:
>
> > > What ever happened to the concept of compromise?
> > 
> > Hoarding free software is anathema to the FSF.  There can be no
> > compromise.
>
>Actually, I have to recant here.  As was pointed out to me via
>e-mail, this statement is too broad.  I still think there is no
>compromising with those who want to hoard a piece of GPL'd
>software forever.  However, I can see an arrangement where a
>software vendor is allowed to hoard and sell a derivative of a
>GPL'd program for x years.  At the end of x years, source for all
>distributed derived works would have to be distributed under the
>terms of the GPL.  The value of x would be negotiated as part of
>the terms of the agreement.  This could be beneficial for both
>the FSF and the software vendor.

You can see that?  And yet I heard not one positive response to
my suggestion of requiring feeding changes back to the author.
-- 
Alfalfa Software, Inc.          |       Poste:  The EMail for Unix
nazgul@alfalfa.com              |       Send Anything... Anywhere
617/497-2922                    |       info@alfalfa.com

I'm not sure which upsets me more: that people are so unwilling to accept
responsibility for their own actions, or that they are so eager to regulate
everyone else's.