On 2007-11-17 22:08 +0530, Siju George wrote: > You don't consider the least thing you can do ( i.e to thank the > authors ) a worth while effort because you have the option to pirate
I'm just saying that most of the good pieces of FOSS are generic clone software, not software with a "face" and a definite author to thank. Actually, I find it funny when very occasionally people do send me "thank you" emails with no other content. It would be different if you had something else to say too, but such idle thank yous are not in the culture I've grown up in. > (is it an option? isn't it illegal? are illegal stuff decent options? ) You think I'd actually buy Windows when I switch to it? (Well, I'd probably get a new computer then, and they tend to come with it.) > But you get upset at people who work on your software so that is is > made available to the masses more easily, Meaning significantly modified obsolete development snapshots still pointing to me for support are made available for the masses. > So just help them out. > Change you licence back to some really free one like the BSDL. And suffer distros _still_ carrying ancient development snapshots. No thanks. It has been suggested that I simply disallow distributing development snapshots. Maybe it would simpler than the current license, but the ideologists in the FOSS herd would still cry that "it's non-free! baawaawaa! He does not like "freedom"! baawaawaa!". And besides, distros should provide important bug fixes to stable releases too -- for me stable implies quality, not "static" like for the distros. Not every bug fix is that important, however, and might be seen be "insignificant" per the license. I don't particularly like the strict 28 day clause myself either, but in a license you have to put something there. I don't like licenses; they make people follow their letter instead of negotiating to find a solution that works for both. That's why I have chosen to create license-free software in the future, if I can be bothered releasing anything. That way I don't have to care so much about the FOSS ideologist politics, and how distros fuck with you. I call it "The Apathy License" and "The Piratic License" -- do what you can get away with, without pissing off the author. Yes, I encourage people to pirate my (and other) software, as long as they don't piss me off. > I politely urge not to add your own terms and create your own licenses > if you would like to share your code in FOSS. I don't particularly care about that; it has been of no tangible benefit so far. It's very difficult to get quality contributions. Take the Xft support for example. I've a zillion times asked people to make a proper dynamically loadable _module_ of it, that users who absolutely want that shit could install. But no, they want you to include and maintain a patch for shit you don't want there. > I am sure your software has been beneficial to a lot of people and so > let it continue to be beneficial. Users can still install it by downloading the original source package, or finding a sensible distributing that respects authors a bit more. -- Tuomo
