OT: Licensing (was Re: Is ruby a viable corporate alternativ

On 11/28/06, Ken B. [email protected] wrote:

Consider yourself warned that Ruby doesn’t have any native compiler (like
perlcc for perl) or bytecode compiler, so if you’re releasing your code
to the world, you have no practical way to protect your investment (yet).

Funny, I get the protection that I want from the GPL (others might want
to substitute there own FLOSS license).

It might be worth remembering that different folks have different goals
releasing the software they write, and there are a number of mechanisms
that can be used to help achieve those goals, no matter what investment
you’ve made.

On 29 Nov 2006, at 13:46, pat eyler wrote:

to substitute there own FLOSS license).


Come to that the amount of commercial Perl code that I’ve seen using
perlcc over the last ten years comes to about zero :slight_smile: Not saying it
never happens, but seems to be pretty darn rare if it is.