Changes between Initial Version and Version 1 of Ticket #26511, comment 56


Ignore:
Timestamp:
03/12/22 20:45:41 (5 months ago)
Author:
gh-tkralphs
Comment:

Legend:

Unmodified
Added
Removed
Modified
  • Ticket #26511, comment 56

    initial v1  
    33I certainly didn't mean to promote undermining or circumventing the intents of individual rights-holders, which should be respected, and I also didn't mean to denigrate anyone's individual choices or characterize them as illegitimate. I'm a passionate open source developer myself and have tried to do my own independent thinking about these issues over years of working with open source licenses. Yes, my views are biased by the frustration of seeing potential projects that seem to be an obvious "good thing" for the world and that I can't see as objectionable to any of the individual rights-holder stopped in their tracks by this license madness. I am frustrated by the divisiveness and the political agendas. I don't assume the FSF speaks for all those who adopt the GPL and would prefer to directly engage with the rights-holders of any code I intend to work with to understand their point of view and intents.
    44
    5 As a devoted open source developer over more than two decades, my only agenda is enabling  people to benefit from the free software I'm contributing to and to grow the community of engaged developers. It would be a win for COIN-OR to be able to partner with Sage. So naturally, I'm looking for a way through this license maze that will allow us to do good work together, of course without undermining the intents of any fellow open source developers. This particular scenario in which the goal is to use an EPL'd code to provide additional functionality within an overall GPL'd code seems harmless to me. The prohibition of this by the linking restriction seems like collateral damage more than something that it by design.
     5As a devoted open source developer over more than two decades, my only agenda is enabling  people to benefit from the free software I'm contributing to and to grow the community of engaged developers. It would be a win for COIN-OR to be able to partner with Sage. So naturally, I'm looking for a way through this license maze that will allow us to do good work together, of course without undermining the intents of any fellow open source developers. This particular scenario in which the goal is to use an EPL'd code to provide additional functionality within an overall GPL'd code seems harmless to me. The prohibition of this by the linking restriction seems like collateral damage more than something that is by design.
    66
    77> That's what COIN-OR did to users of python-mip by imposing the copyleft EPL license on it, replacing the previous permissive license -- which is the actual problem that I pointed out in comment:34 (and our email exchange in 2021).