User: Password:
|
|
Subscribe / Log in / New account

Behind the Puppet license change

Behind the Puppet license change

Posted May 16, 2011 12:57 UTC (Mon) by job (guest, #670)
Parent article: Behind the Puppet license change

GPL is not tested enough in court -- but Apache license somehow is? Smells like someone is thinking something but not saying it.

I understand the concern about linking, that's been the hard to understand part of the GPL from the beginning. But isn't Puppet a Ruby application? A runtime interpreted program should not have concerns about linking.

By the way, if Kanies wants Puppet to be ubiquitous that's probably the runtime is probably his primary concern. That dependency will always set a hard limit on the software's ubiquity. Ruby will probably never reach the market size of Pyhon or Perl and neither of those is really ubiquitous.


(Log in to post comments)

Behind the Puppet license change

Posted May 19, 2011 11:31 UTC (Thu) by sitaram (guest, #5959) [Link]

"Should not have concerns about linking" is not sufficient for many people. They'd rather not have to even *think* about the tech stack being used, who's calling what and using what API, and does this constitute a GPL "combining", etc.

Apache is so bland, and so clearly does not require *any* source code of your own to be revealed under *any* circumstances, that they are not even worried about "tested in court".

I can certainly see their point, if I put on a paranoid corporate lawyer hat.

Behind the Puppet license change

Posted May 19, 2011 15:18 UTC (Thu) by jjs (guest, #10315) [Link]

Even worse, there's a reason GPL isn't tested in courts. Because it's so rock-solid companies who violate the GPL realize going to court will cost them big. So they settle rather than head to certain failure.

GPL basically says "you have certain rights under copyright. We will grant you additional rights, but you agree grant the same rights to those who get your code. If you don't you don't have a license." Those who violate the GPL end up violating copyright without a license.

The fact that no companies are willing to test it in court signifies to me the strength, not the weakness.

Behind the Puppet license change

Posted May 21, 2011 19:37 UTC (Sat) by gvy (guest, #11981) [Link]

Hm, but IIRC it actually *was* taken to court several years ago, no? (don't remember the exact names by now even if was quite surprised along the same lines you've drawn)


Copyright © 2017, Eklektix, Inc.
Comments and public postings are copyrighted by their creators.
Linux is a registered trademark of Linus Torvalds