[GRASSLIST:10801] Re: [GRASS5] FWD: [OSGeo-Discuss] Incubation Committee / Contributor Agreements]

[Roger Bivand]

On Wed, 8 Mar 2006, Thomas Adams wrote:

> I am not a GRASS developer at this point, but I would *like* to begin 
> contributing at some point in the future as some time frees up for me. 
> Personally, I prefer the 'R' model and the term "free-enough for most 
> people" worries me. Does the R licensing fall under the "free-enough for 
> most people" umbrella? If so, then I guess it works out OK. It indeed 
> would be a shame to see some of the most productive developers siphoned 
> off as Glynn suggests could happen.

No, the approach adopted by the R core developers is very much that
expressed by Glynn. The "free enough for most people" view is a user trap,
making users remain consumers rather than encouraging users to contribute
mutually to development, it makes the user base more passive. It also
deters developers from contributing unless they have security that their
effort and skill will not be abused. It's a matter of confidence within
the broader community of users and developers, where everybody can make a
useful contribution, not least by asking good questions. There are 
honest differences of opinion, of course, but the R community is GPL/LGPL 
for the core engine and the vast majority of contributed packages.

Roger

> 
> Tom
> 
> 
> Laurent C. wrote:
> > 2006/3/8, Glynn Clements <glynn at gclements.plus.com 
> > <mailto:glynn at gclements.plus.com>>:
> >
> >
> >     As I see it, the main risk of allowing proprietary derivatives is a
> >     risk of "siphoning off" developers and beta testers (aka "users") from
> >     the free version towards a "mostly, but not quite" free version.
> >
> >     IMHO, the biggest risk is with versions which are "free-enough for
> >     most people", e.g. "free for non-commercial use". OpenDWG is probably
> >     a good example; it isn't "Free Software", but it's close enough to
> >     significantly reduce the chances of a genuinely-free alternative being
> >     developed.
> >
> >  
> >
> > Hello list, hello Glynn,
> >
> > I don't think OpenDWG is a good example because there is no free 
> > alternative and AFAIK Open Desing Alliance hasn't fork any free 
> > software, and there is no community around this project.
> > *BSD OS are free for more than 10 years, and many commercial 
> > derivatives has born. *BSD still have strong community.
> > I don't think BSD, MIT and other permissive licences are threat for 
> > opensource developpers and users.
> >
> > According to the first draft of GPLv3, it seem that gplv3 software 
> > will be more "compatible" with other free software.
> >
> > Just my two cents
> >
> > Laurent
> 
> 
> 

-- 
Roger Bivand
Economic Geography Section, Department of Economics, Norwegian School of
Economics and Business Administration, Helleveien 30, N-5045 Bergen,
Norway. voice: +47 55 95 93 55; fax +47 55 95 95 43
e-mail: Roger.Bivand at nhh.no