Skip to content

Comment on Novell and Xamarin Partnership around Monoparent

Comments

Short answer: Because lawyers cost money.

LGPL code is not magically perfect. I've modified most third party libs I've used. If those are LGPL, I have to make sure those changes get back to the public. I either have to put messages on the game screen about where to get the code, or I have to ship the code on the disc. This is simply not going to happen in most corp environments without extensive lawyer say-so. As an independent, github make fulfilling this obligation a lot easier and I've used it for that purpose.

However there is a second problem. In some situations (iOS for example, but there are others with broken build pipelines) a separate "Library" does not work. The code must be compiled in directly. Is it now no longer a library for legal purposes? If not, then the whole product is now covered by GPL. Fuck. That is just not something that can be risked. Sorry.

So instead I only use software that is "Free" as in "Freedom to do what I want with it", like BSD, MIT or Apache.

> So instead I only use software that is "Free" as in "Freedom to do what I want with it", like BSD, MIT or Apache.

As a developer, I sure enjoy the freedoms BSD and MIT grant me. If I held a lot of patents, I wouldn't be so happy with Apache.

OTOH, as a user, I appreciate the rights *GPL software gives me.

BSD vs. GPL is a user rights vs. developer rights thing. You use your license as a tool to achieve the balance you intend to reach.

BTW, the way Canonical used the AGPL with Launchpad is brilliant. I never imagined that license could be that useful.

AboutSource Built by g1lg1l

Hackerly is an independent reader for Hacker News, built on the public HN API. Not affiliated with Y Combinator.