Let's have a GPL vs BSD debate
There are people who don't like the BSD license and there are those who don't like the GPL license. I know it is a long standing debate, but I haven't seen it discussed here in a while.
I am an open source developer and I have a few programs that people use. Nothing as popular as Apache or PostgreSQL, but a fair number of users.
My view is this: I write my code because I use it in my business. I don't mind sharing it with people, but that does not mean I want to lose control or ownership of it.
My programs are licensed with the GPL and the interface libraries are LGPL. People may use the programs and libraries as provided without any GPL contamination. However, if they modify or improve my programs or libraries, they must make their changes public just as I made them public in the first place.
Let's have a GPL vs BSD debate 5153
begin oeprotect.scr This is entirely a reverse from my experience. I'm nervous about contributing changes to BSD projects, because my changes can be taken away and relicensed on different...
This way, someone can't take my code, build upon it, and compete with me with mostly my own code. They are free to compete with me with my code as long as I can compete with them with their code. That seems fair, doesn't it?
The BSD license has no such protection.
Linux Advocacy Newsgroups