Re: [ba-ohs-talk] Bootstrap and Licensing
James Michael DuPont wrote: (01)
> > That's really too bad. Outside of writing a book,
> > that
> > was the only possibility in the long list that let
> > you
> > create something that went out and produced income
> > while you're sleeping.
> Hmmm..... you can still sell your modules.
> > Everything else is
> > labor-intensive,
> > which does little to achieve the goal of freeing up
> > time
> > to devote on the "important" work.
> Hmmm..... well, I am not sure what to say, either you
> make sure all your add-ones are gpl, or you will find
> people opting out very quickly. All of a sudden no-one
> wants to contribute because XYZ will be just taking it
> a running with it.
> That is what the LGPL is for, providing linkage to
> third parties.
> How many of you want to build non-free addons?
> Who wants to contribute core code?
> What is the dividing line?
> Who is to say what is free and what is not?
> There is not an infrastructure yet, a data model a
> transport mechanism. Once that is in place, and it
> could be done under the LGPL, then you can start
> creating applications. (02)
Actually, I have nothing to sell, and am not planning on selling
My arguments have always been predicated on the problem of
funding people to build a thing that needs building. How do you
do that? That's the only problem I have attempted to solve. (04)
That entire proposition has been a non-starter, however. It
emerged still-born. The other avenue is GPL. I hope it succeeds,
and that the obstacles to it are removed. (05)