22 Jun
2003
22 Jun
'03
12:10 a.m.
Am Son, 2003-06-22 um 02.46 schrieb Tim Hockin:
I wouldn't decline this idea so fast, i
think he made a valid point.
If you watch todays software market, especially the battle between the
OSes, you can see Apple as well as M$ aquiring so-called
"Killer-Applications" which shall force people who need that Apps to
move to their OS. Especially what Apple did with Emagic Logic is a
perfect example.
Now if you allow your Open Source Applications to be ported to this
proprietary OSes, you strengthen this behaviour and weaken the Open
Source Movement. People will get your software but will stick with OSX
or whatever cause of this called Killerapps.
And i dont think GPL is not so much about not ppl letting you force to
use special software. IMO its more about sharing and passing knowledge
(great both in a technical but also social/political way) and do better
software by the benefits of it.
Actually i dont know if this new form of GPL is a good idea, but i guess
its worth thinking about it, as you still have the goods of opensource
but just decline the possibility to support Non-Opensource Systems.
In the end, we
will not reap what we have sown. Users on the OS X will
be theoretically able to run Ardour as much as we will, especially now
that jackd has been ported to OS X. To me, this does not seem right.
I guess I don't see it as a problem. Forcing people to use this or that
software is exactly what GPL is AGAINST. Use whatever works for you.
Perhaps we should make a mended version of GPL
that would have exact
permissions like the original GPL license, but in addition would ask
that the software cannot be run on top of proprietary OS. This way, we
can make our software indigenous only to free/oss OS's and hence create
I guesss feel free to do it with your own software - I don't know that such
a proviso is in my best interests..