Subj : Re: GNU Public Licences Revisited (again) To : comp.programming From : Randy Howard Date : Sun Sep 18 2005 09:34 am Richard Heathfield wrote (in article ): > Joe Butler said: > >> >> I can >> now clearly see that the proponents of free software seem a bit >> overzealous. > > Not all of them. True. It's, as usual in all areas where terms like 'zealot', 'evangelist' and 'advocate' get used, true mainly of the extreme fringe folks. > Look, it's really simple. A programmer writes a program. He now has a choice > - sell it, or give it away. That's HIS CHOICE. I agree. But that is /not/ what some of the more adamant folks, particularly those likely to have a portrait of stallman hanging on the wall would have you think. More importantly, I get the distinct impression from some of the recent participants here, they want you to not have even have the right to decide that for yourself, but rather to make it illegal. > Sometimes, I choose to give > software away. Other times, I might prefer to sell it. That's my choice. > The product provider chooses whether to charge for his product. Again, obviously, I agree. > Hats off to RMS for sticking to his guns on this. I think he himself is a > bit overzealous, but somebody has to be! I prefer a more laid-back approach > myself. I have no problem with his desire to have more free software available in the world. What I do have a problem with is the 'make all the other kinds go away, by force if necessary' aspect. -- Randy Howard (2reply remove FOOBAR) .