Gazoduc, what I see at that link is a selective posting (my previous
posts omitted, I note 
of this thread. I don’t see anything added
that could justify the claim that the GPL is responsible for Linux being
distribution oriented and FreeBSD more research oriented, especially
given the rival hypothesis that BSD is more research oriented because
its creator is a research university. Occam’s Razor, and all that…
Claims that one license or another cause one complex outcome or another
are gross oversimplifications of complex social, political, and economic
dynamics. The first bit of advice you received in response to your
initial question remains the only sensible piece of advice in this
thread: use whatever license you think best (from Austin Z.'s first
post). Any effort to justify that choice by appeal to grand visions or
universal values is either analytical overreach or FUD – and probably
both.
It’s important and quite possible to understand the basic, factual
differences among licensing approaches; it’s neither important nor
possible to find The O. Best Licenseâ„¢. You would perform a small
service to the amount of truth in the world if you just pick the option
that makes the most sense for your immediate decision and avoid trying
to justify that choice as superior in some larger way.
ciao, --Chris
Gazoduc wrote:
Please have a look here : MIT vs GPL vs LGPL for open source project - Rails - Ruby-Forum .
I posted some ideas on how the GNU GPL has made Linux distribution
oriented while the BSD license has made FreeBSD and the like research
oriented.
–
Posted via http://www.ruby-forum.com/.
Rails mailing list
[email protected]
http://lists.rubyonrails.org/mailman/listinfo/rails