From: jqb AT netcom DOT com (Jim Balter) Subject: Re: Cygnus Cygwin32 Press Release 1/21/97 15 Feb 1997 01:47:12 -0800 Approved: cygnus DOT gnu-win32 AT cygnus DOT com Distribution: cygnus Message-ID: <3304E74A.4DCF.cygnus.gnu-win32@netcom.com> References: <199702102213 DOT OAA00787 AT andare DOT fugue DOT com> <3301B544 DOT 4A4F DOT cygnus DOT gnu-win32 AT netcom DOT com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Mailer: Mozilla 3.01Gold (WinNT; I) Original-To: Stan Shebs Original-CC: gnu-win32 AT cygnus DOT com Original-Sender: owner-gnu-win32 AT cygnus DOT com Stan Shebs wrote: > It actually seems a little hypocritical for a proprietary software > developer to complain that Cygnus is not handing them a bunch of code > that they can just incorporate and make a big profit with the result, > with no sort of contribution back to the free software community. Since no one here has made this complaint, I don't know who you are addressing. What is hypocritical is to pretend that Cygnus is somehow doing what they are doing in order to encourage companies not to hoard software, rather than to make a buck off the fact that companies *do* hoard software. Paying Cygnus a license fee is not a "contribution back to the free software community", as I see it. > We're giving proprietary developers a simple choice; use the GPLed > library and be willing to make your software free, or buy out of the > GPL using the same sort of license that you have with your other > library vendors. That's fine, but a consequence of this strategy is that cygwin can no longer be treated as an unencumbered contribution to the community, but rather a source of profit to Cygnus. People who may have seen themselves as "contributors" really are "beta testers". Cygnus has every right to put it within that framework, but a consequence is a change in the relationship with those contributors. Note that the original poster on this thread referred to a "community effort"; I was the one who challenged that on Cygnus' behalf. It *could* have been a community effort, but that is no longer possible. Rather than understand this, you folks seem to defensively be seeing "condemnations" around every corner. When I point out that Cygnus has deviated from the FSF/GNU free software concept, you seem to get offended, and spend lots of energy explaining why it makes good business sense to deviate. So we are just agreeing. Cygnus is there to make profit; that includes making profit off the fact that companies hoard software. The marketers see the fact that companies hoard software as providing a market for a piece of code that was developed with a different intent. So when Jeremy Allison says "This allows you to use Cygwin32 and not share your source (boo, hiss)", he is at the very least leaving a false impression. The folks he is booing and hissing are the people that are his source of income. -- - For help on using this list, send a message to "gnu-win32-request AT cygnus DOT com" with one line of text: "help".