cocoon-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Stefano Mazzocchi <stef...@apache.org>
Subject Re: LGPL + APL = not good!
Date Mon, 17 Apr 2000 21:35:54 GMT
Brett McLaughlin wrote:
> 
> Stefano Mazzocchi wrote:
> >
> > Paul Russell wrote:
> > >
> > > > See? no need for legal troubles.
> > >
> > > In the nicest possible way, I don't see this. How many other
> > > libraries are we going to miss out on long term becase of this?
> > > A *lot* of code is, (and will continue to be) released under
> > > the LGPL.
> > >
> > > Also, I'm not entirely sure that we can entirely ignore regexps
> > > for sitemap use - people *are* going to want to use them;
> > > personally, I speak fluent regexp and it's surprising how useful
> > > it can be.
> >
> > I'm _strongly_ -1 to regexp in the sitemap.
> 
> Agreed.  Pattern matching is a parsing _component_, not some sort of
> utility package (in regards to XML applications).  It also is part of
> the W3C XML Schema Recommendation, and therefore will show up in Apache
> Xerces before you know it, as they plan to catch up to the latest XML
> Schema specification.  So there are two (non-legal) reasons to avoid
> writing regexp for Cocoon.
> 
> Additionally, I'm +1 (btw, Stefano, how's my commit status coming?)
> behind avoiding LGPL (and of course GPL).  Yes, a lot of code is
> released under LGPL.  There's a lot of code released under Microsoft
> that people choose not to use as well, because *it locks them into a
> paradigm that they want to avoid.*
> 
> Just as Microsoft forces you to not only choose them once, but over and
> over and over again (as compatibility spirals), LGPL forces you to
> choose LGPL over and over and over again.  You are assuming that a
> choice like using this or that library from LGPL is a /single, isolated/
> choice, when in fact, it forces choices long down the line.
> 
> My honest opinion is that as soon as LGPL enters Cocoon, we are going to
> have problems that will only grow.  Does this mean that we'll miss out
> on some good code?  Yes.  Does it mean we'll have to work harder,
> sometimes seeing fewer results?  Yes.  Is that worth being able to have
> our user base use our software with impunity?  Absolutely.
> 
> Guys, we are, ultimately, shoe salesmen.  We don't exist without a user
> base, and that user base needs solutions that do not limit them, but in
> fact expand them.  Why would we sell anyone a pair of shoes with the
> laces of the two shoes knotted together?  They may get out of the store
> admiring the pair, but sooner or later will be tripped up; probably when
> they are in a hurry.  Do you see how the analagy applies?  Let's stay
> BSD as long as possible, because it's the right thing to do, not because
> it's the easiest.

Very well said!!!

-- 
Stefano Mazzocchi      One must still have chaos in oneself to be
                          able to give birth to a dancing star.
<stefano@apache.org>                             Friedrich Nietzsche
--------------------------------------------------------------------
 Missed us in Orlando? Make it up with ApacheCON Europe in London!
------------------------- http://ApacheCon.Com ---------------------

Mime
View raw message