Phantom menace? Threat that, so far, has not existed? Sorry - you are DEAD wrong.
Posted Oct 4, 2008 7:25 UTC (Sat) by khim
In reply to: GPLv3 anti-DRM clause
Parent article: Plugging into GCC
Aha. So NOW we are at stage where we are ignoring history if it does not suit us, right? Menace was clearly not phantom and threat was quite real - and you can read about this story here. These two sentences pretty much invalidate all your affectations: Why do we have a free C++ compiler? Only because the GNU GPL said it had to be free. That's pretty big accomplishment of all these "draconian restrictions" if you ask me.
Of course that was then and we are talking about now, but... those who cannot remember the past are condemned to repeat it so we can not ignore the past and do everything you can to facilitate and create the best, most flexible, and most beneficial compiler you can and IF proprietary software becomes a problem THEN do something to try to deal with. Because the proprietary software WAS and IS the threat. Quite real and tangible. Yes, some companies like to play nice with free software (IBM, Google, etc)... as long as free software benefits them. Once that's not the case... all bets are off.
Now, does it mean GCC should not implement plugins system? Of course not: it's usable for free software too. But do that and pretend that "proprietary threat" does not exist... it's just folly.
to post comments)