Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id ; Sat, 27 Jul 2002 12:19:09 -0400 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id ; Sat, 27 Jul 2002 12:19:09 -0400 Received: from bitmover.com ([192.132.92.2]:5775 "EHLO bitmover.com") by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id ; Sat, 27 Jul 2002 12:19:08 -0400 Date: Sat, 27 Jul 2002 09:22:23 -0700 From: Larry McVoy To: Rik van Riel Cc: Larry McVoy , Federico Ferreres , Alexander Viro , linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Subject: Re: Funding GPL projects or funding the GPL? Message-ID: <20020727092223.B26813@work.bitmover.com> Mail-Followup-To: Larry McVoy , Rik van Riel , Larry McVoy , Federico Ferreres , Alexander Viro , linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org References: <20020727085931.X26813@work.bitmover.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline User-Agent: Mutt/1.2.5.1i In-Reply-To: ; from riel@conectiva.com.br on Sat, Jul 27, 2002 at 01:06:56PM -0300 Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Content-Length: 1942 Lines: 39 On Sat, Jul 27, 2002 at 01:06:56PM -0300, Rik van Riel wrote: > Some other areas won't ever get the funding through donations, > simply because people will freeload whenever they can and try > funding development as much as they can. We've seen that with > BitKeeper and you had to "tighten up" the license a bit in order > to make sure development stayed funded. Yeah, and I wasn't thrilled about it, I can tell you that. I had the same starry eyed idealistic idea that things would just work out and they don't. So we're essentially in a proprietary model with a funky dual free/pay licensing model. That's OK for us because the money people value their privacy. Actually, that's an interesting topic. Other applications could use the BK model of "free if you're out in the open" and pay otherwise. It's pretty effective. However, it doesn't work very well when the community beats you to hell for not being GPLed. I had a thick enough skin to deal with it, I doubt others would, they'd give up. It also doesn't work when people refuse to obey the license because they don't agree with it (we had plenty of that). That leads to the real question: what is an acceptable model for the community and the vendor for applications which don't work under the standard GPL model? > In short, I believe the voluntary donations aren't needed in > most areas people would donate to and won't make enough of an > impact in the areas where they are needed. Agreed, but his thought was to make it non-voluntary. I have my doubts about that working too, but there ought to be something which would work. -- --- Larry McVoy lm at bitmover.com http://www.bitmover.com/lm - To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/