This is the mail archive of the
gcc@gcc.gnu.org
mailing list for the GCC project.
Re: Why not contribute? (to GCC)
On 04/26/2010 02:00 PM, Richard Kenner wrote:
If I own 1% of the code of a program and somebody makes it non-free, I'm
going to be upset, but probably not enough to either sue the person or try
to organize a group do to collectively. But if instead I assigned that
software to a group that decided to sue, I'd be very happy they did and
glad that my assignment let them be able to do it.
Nobody can take your code and make it non-free.
They can take a copy of your code and modify it, but at no time does
your original code become non-free. As long as people continue to copy
from your "free" version of the code, they can continue to use it for
"free".
The GPL isn't free though. The GPL is a limited use license that
restricts freedoms in such a way that there is some expectation that the
lost freedoms can purchase future freedom, and this compromise is justified.
Many of us don't agree that the compromise is justified. This will
forever be a political difference between the two sides, and is unlikely
to be resolved here. This is an FSF/GPL issue more than a GCC issue. It
just so happens that GCC is one of the most easily recognized and widely
used FSF-owned projects, so it is an easy target for us GPL haters. :-)
For the record: There is no ill will about the project. Some of us just
don't understand why GCC couldn't survive or thrive under a less
restrictive contribution and/or licensing model. We know of other
projects that are near equal or in some cases greater than GCC in terms
of actual impact on the world today that do not seem to share the same
contribution and/or licensing model. Before anybody gets upset about
this - please realize that I see GCC primarily as a compiler that
translates from source form to executable form, and that there exists
compatible or near compatible alternatives to GCC that could be switched
to within a few months or less for most projects with an annoying but
minimum amount of fuss. I also think that any truly free platform should
have alternative implementations to avoid vendor lock and to enable
healthy competition that will lead to better overall results for the end
users.
Cheers,
mark