On Wed, Jul 14, 2004 at 03:12:25PM -0400, Brian Thomas Sniffen wrote:Of course distribution is of interest to the original developer. The original recipient (who I provided the software to) is making a copy of something that I put effort into without necessarily giving me anything in return.Distribution is no more of interest to the original developer than modification. If I'm distributing to you, what business of the developer's is it? [...]
While this is the case for free software, isn't the problem that QPL requires us to give something to the original developer in return?
[...] So a Free license isn't going to involve the original author sticking his nose into my private distribution [...]In what way does it serve free software to allow people to hoardmodifications rather than allow the community to take advantage of them?
It also seems to allow software to develop in sheltered communities without interference from an obnoxious original developer. If it is good, it will probably escape from the shelter.
-- MJR/slef My Opinion Only and not of any group I know http://www.ttllp.co.uk/ for creative copyleft computing "Matthew Garrett is quite the good sort of fellow, despite what my liver is sure to say about him in [...] 40 years" -- branden