Eric S. Raymond on GPL and BSD licenses. & Microsoft coming toLinux

[BCS]

Reply to Yigal,

> On 30/03/2009 04:42, Mike Parker wrote:
> 
>> No, it gives no freedom to developers at all. Using any GPL code in
>> your project /forces/ you to open your source. It takes the decision
>> of whether to open or not out of your hands and puts it in the hands
>> of whomever created the GPLed product you use. That's why you won't
>> find bindings for any GPL libraries in Derelict, because then
>> Derelict and any project that uses it would have to be GPL. You call
>> that freedom?
>> 
> all I can say is: huh?
> Nobody forces you to use GPL code if you don't like it. Sorry to say
> that, but the above is bullshit.
> GPL *is a* license. if I write code and license it with my preferred
> license, no matter if it's GPL or NDAed proprietary license, if you
> want
> to use *my* code, you need to abide by *my* rules. I am a developer, I
> write code, *I* decide under what terms can you use it. that's as
> simple
> as that.

GPL says in effect to the client programmer: "If you use /my/ code than /you/ 
have to release /your/ code on /my/ terms."

That works but reads as an ultimatum and leaves it unusable for many people.

[...]

> nothing prevents you from using free software libraries with your
> closed
> source project, that's why we have the LGPL.

But we're not talking about LGPL (the fact the the LGPL exists sort of supports 
Mike's point).