[erlang-questions] A PropEr announcement

OvermindDL1 overminddl1@REDACTED
Thu Jun 16 09:09:23 CEST 2011

On Jun 16, 2011 12:48 AM, "Jon Watte" <jwatte@REDACTED> wrote:
> As a commercial entity with (unrelated) IP to protect, I may be able to
USE GPLv3 software, as long as I don't distribute to others (free or not),
but there is no way I can CONTRIBUTE to GPL v3, because of the uncertainty
around usage-based poisoning of patents and other IP.
> Regarding "others may make money if it's MIT" -- so what? Is the point to
help the world in useful ways, or not? Useful things tend to make money. If
there's an alternate, commercially supported, non-gpl license available for
payment, that solves that problem, but if you won't make that available,
choosing gplv3 just means you choose *not* to help a large set of software
> Jw

Exactly.  I have contributed code to many non-gpl projects, but I cannot to
gpl for the same reason, and likewise I cannot use gpl things either because
I always release my code under more permissive licenses because I want it to
be actually useful and used and not wage some holy war.

Also, as a side point, in my experiences, when you have someone who is
*forced* to release code it is always of such low quality so as to be
unusable anyway, where the people who actually want to release code always
tend to be much higher and of actually useful quality.  As I see it gpl code
not only reduces their audience but they also get fewer quality patches,
which makes no sense to me at all.  I make code to be used, not to make a
worthless point.

Now my original other question, how does this compare to the one at the
afore-mentioned link?

> On Jun 15, 2011 11:13 PM, "Max Lapshin" <max.lapshin@REDACTED> wrote:
> > Damn, what a problem in GPL for a testing program?
> > Guys just want to protect their investment, but want to make a free
> > advertisement by offering their excelent product to community.
> > If it would be MIT, they can see their work in commercial product
> > without any profit for them.
> >
> > There is absolutely no problem in using GPL software to test your
> > products: just don't include it into distribution.
> >
> > Tests are not part of PropEr, but if any of you is afraid of GPL
> > virus, so don't include tests into your main repository: keep it
> > separate.
> > For example, I don't include test files for erlyvideo tests into
> > repository, because I don't want accidential discussions with their
> > potential copyright holders.
> >
> >
> > Btw, about PropEr. It is so widely told, that it is a magic tool, that
> > can remove all bugs in software, that I'm very interested to try it.
> > I will try to find time for it and tell if it helped me with erlyvideo
or not.
> > _______________________________________________
> > erlang-questions mailing list
> > erlang-questions@REDACTED
> > http://erlang.org/mailman/listinfo/erlang-questions
> _______________________________________________
> erlang-questions mailing list
> erlang-questions@REDACTED
> http://erlang.org/mailman/listinfo/erlang-questions
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://erlang.org/pipermail/erlang-questions/attachments/20110616/9cb0ea2c/attachment.htm>

More information about the erlang-questions mailing list