I cannot fully understand what you mean by
"Netware client".
In any case, Evolution for mail and Gaim for IM
work perfectly with Groupwise, iFolder works, I
can see printers... and the whole company (just
most of it for now) is using Linux internally.
Well, I live in Italy, near Milano, and I've been seeing this kind of ads in the tube for some year... the 1st I remember was a runner that looked like racing with the train (the ad was for the "Adidas" shoes).
Maybe the technology was different, but the effect was just the one described!
First of all, thanks for everything you've done for free software, both promoting and producing it.
My question is related to the problems many people have with the GPL license vs. the LGPL one (this topic has also been covered by a recent Slashdot article, and I think that everybody knows what you wrote on the difference between the two licenses).
To summarize what I think is the main issue, the GPL is focused on the actions of copying, distributing and modifying a "program". It explicitly states that "the act of running the program is not restricted". I assume that by "running the program" one means "using the program", because generally software is used executing it. Basically, the GPL grants the user freedom of use, and freedom of speech. That granting freedom of use is in the spirit of the license is also stated clearly in "http://www.gnu.org/philosophy/free-sw.html". Here the basic "freedoms" related to free software are numbered from zero to three. The first (and therefore most basic) one is freedom of use.
In my opinion, the most straightforward way of using a library is that of linking against it, either statically or dynamically. In fact, I can hardly conceive another way of using a library.
On the other hand, a work "based on" the library would be a modification of the library, or a program "including" the library or a modified version or part of it literally in the source code, without linking.
I am giving these definitions because I feel they are consistent with the ones we use for programs: you use a program loading it in memory and running it, and you use a procedure exactly in the same way. Moreover, with component based architectures (like CORBA, COM, of GNOME's BONOBO) the distinction between programs and libraries literally fades away.
Now, the question: the GPL allows you to run a program inside a proprietary operating system, but it does not allow you to run a procedure inside a proprietary program. An application that "works with" a free program is not "based on" it, it simply uses it. This is true even if the free program is distributed with the application (like movemail with Netscape on Unix). On the other hand, you say that a non free application that calls (uses?) a free procedure is "based on" the procedure, and therefore the GPL does not grant the authors of such an application the right to use the procedure, even if the procedure is supposed to be "free software", and freedom of use is a basic freedom for software.
Don't you think this is contradictory, and against your own principles? After all, the GPL is really revoking freedom of use from free software in many circumstances!
Slashdot Mirror
This obviously prooves that Scotty *did* reveal the formula :-)
Actually, wouldn't you use "yeld" in C#?
Is it just me, or this looks like a low level implementation of what you can easily do with the C# "yeld" statement?
I cannot fully understand what you mean by "Netware client".
In any case, Evolution for mail and Gaim for IM work perfectly with Groupwise, iFolder works, I can see printers... and the whole company (just most of it for now) is using Linux internally.
So it is working in their operating environment!
Yes, it is going better (disclaimer: I am a Novell employee).
Besides what the parent said, there are two other advantages here:
- The NLD distribution, which has been thought exactly for this kind of use.
- Evolution works as a groupwise client itself (for IM you can just use Gaim, it works with groupwise as well).
Well, I live in Italy, near Milano, and I've
been seeing this kind of ads in the tube for
some year... the 1st I remember was a runner
that looked like racing with the train (the
ad was for the "Adidas" shoes).
Maybe the technology was different, but the
effect was just the one described!
Ciao,
Massimiliano
First of all, thanks for everything you've done for free software,
both promoting and producing it.
My question is related to the problems many people have with the
GPL license vs. the LGPL one (this topic has also been covered by
a recent Slashdot article, and I think that everybody knows what
you wrote on the difference between the two licenses).
To summarize what I think is the main issue, the GPL is focused on
the actions of copying, distributing and modifying a "program". It
explicitly states that "the act of running the program is not
restricted". I assume that by "running the program" one means
"using the program", because generally software is used executing
it. Basically, the GPL grants the user freedom of use, and freedom
of speech. That granting freedom of use is in the spirit of the
license is also stated clearly in
"http://www.gnu.org/philosophy/free-sw.html".
Here the basic "freedoms" related to free software are numbered
from zero to three. The first (and therefore most basic) one is
freedom of use.
In my opinion, the most straightforward way of using a library is
that of linking against it, either statically or dynamically. In
fact, I can hardly conceive another way of using a library.
On the other hand, a work "based on" the library would be a
modification of the library, or a program "including" the library
or a modified version or part of it literally in the source code,
without linking.
I am giving these definitions because I feel they are consistent
with the ones we use for programs: you use a program loading it in
memory and running it, and you use a procedure exactly in the same
way. Moreover, with component based architectures (like CORBA, COM,
of GNOME's BONOBO) the distinction between programs and libraries
literally fades away.
Now, the question: the GPL allows you to run a program inside a
proprietary operating system, but it does not allow you to run a
procedure inside a proprietary program. An application that
"works with" a free program is not "based on" it, it simply uses
it. This is true even if the free program is distributed with the
application (like movemail with Netscape on Unix). On the other
hand, you say that a non free application that calls (uses?) a free
procedure is "based on" the procedure, and therefore the GPL does
not grant the authors of such an application the right to use the
procedure, even if the procedure is supposed to be "free
software", and freedom of use is a basic freedom for software.
Don't you think this is contradictory, and against your own
principles? After all, the GPL is really revoking freedom of use
from free software in many circumstances!
Thanks,
Massimiliano