David.Turing's blog

 

Apache License更适合中国人

Apache License更适合中国人,正式迎接Wayer Grant的挑战

很久以前,我开始着手写一些基于Security的插件,由于我使用Eclipse,Eclipse插件似乎本身对我很有帮助,我在从事插件开发的同时,只是写一些很简单的基于BouncyCastle的工具类。有一天,我看到了Portecle, 它是KeytoolGUI的一个分支,我觉得它的功能跟KeyStore 2.4大同小异,版权信息表明,2004年以后Wayne Grant并没有再参与此软件的任何开发。
Copyright © 2004 Wayne Grant
            2004 Mark Majczyk
            2004-2005 Ville Skyttä
我着手在Protecle和KeytoolGUI的基础上编写一个安全插件,名为SecureX。Protecle和KeytoolGUI是基于Swing,我编写了一个跟他们几乎很相像的SWT使用界面(当然不少地方作了增强),我希望使用上述的copyright来发布该Eclipse插件,我这样想的理由有两个:

第一,SecureX不只是集成KeytoolGUI这个证书管理模块,而且还会集成签名,加密等模块,这样,我们将来开发界面应用的时候,我们开源队伍可以同步开发,只要我们按照Eclipse RCP规范,我们不存在任何的集成问题。
第二,SecureX不希望使用GPL,而想使用Apache License。但由于Wayne Grant多次警告,如果我relicense(使用了他的代码于SecureX,并将SecureX重新定位于Apache License),他将对我采取法律行动。其实,GPL跟Apache License的最大区别是,GPL要求修改代码必须也遵守GPL,也就是说,如果我屈服于wayne, 将SecureX应用了GPL,其他人将无法将SecureX应用于商业用途,除非他们承诺他们的商业软件遵循GPL,你说可能吗:) 相比之下,Apache License更自由,它强调使用源代码的人不需要公开自己的源代码(修改后的源代码),也就是说,如果SecureX使用Apache License,SecureX的用户可以任意修改它,并且可以选择以源代码的方式或者二进制代码的方式发布他们自己的成果(他们唯一需要做的是——在他们的成果中声明使用了SecureX的代码).

我第一次向Wayne发邮件,邀请他他的回信如下:

Hello David,

Some guidance for you.

I have copyright over KeyTool GUI.  You therefore cannot call your
application "KeyTool GUI" or anything similar.  Lazgo Software has copyright
and trademark over "KeyStore Explorer" so you cannot call it that either.

KeyTool GUI is GPL software.  If your application contains code from KeyTool
GUI then your application as a whole must obey the GPL license.  This means
that you must release your own code as GPL and not under any other license
terms.  The headers in the existing code must be left how you found them -
that is with the GPL license and my copyright intact.

I have no wish to be listed as author of your application.  Simply state on
your web site and in the application that your application is based on a
fork of KeyTool GUI of which I am the copyright owner.  For an example see
the Portecle web site (
http://portecle.sourceforge.net/) - Portecle is
similar to your app in that it is a fork of KeyTool GUI.

Let me know if you have any questions.

- Wayne.

----------------------------------

Dear Waner Grant:
   I've written a Keytool Eclipse Plugin which support most features of KeyStore
2.4.
   As you know, KeyStore 2.4 is written in Swing, I rewirte your
application by SWT.
So that it has a native look and more, I integrate my XML signature module
in this
application.
   For more info, see
http://dev2dev.bea.com.cn/bbs/thread.jspa?forumID=29304&threadID=31955&tstart=0
   And i will publish this Eclipse Plugin in next two weeks. Becasue wanner
Grant
is the first author of this software, So I plan to use his name as first
author and mine
as the second author.  Will this be reasonable?
   Any Advice would be great appreciately.


Wayne的目的很简单,他要求我不能使用Keytool GUI或者KeyStore Explorer类似的名称, 并且他要求我
必须使用GPL的许可证,这一点我非常不满,我于是回信给他,强调我要求relicense GPL。我知道我这样
说有点对牛弹琴,因为他应该不会授权我relicense。

The shell is all written by me. And I will add signature and
 Watermark feature to this software,  I only use some
Util Class of your KeyTool GUI such as KeyPairUtil, DigestUtil
and X509CertUtil etc and of Course,I will not change the code
and the header of them!
 
Feel ease if I don't plan to abidance by GPL :)  I like Apache
License only.
 
The new release of SecureX Eclipse Plugin will all be free but
i will opensource in the next release becasue the code is too
bad:(

Beta SecureX plugin will be publish next week, so if you have more
advice, please let me know.
 
 
     regards
david


Wayne的回复同样让我感到很大的压力,除非我必须遵循GPL,否则我似乎无所作为:

David,

>I only use some
>Util Class of your KeyTool GUI such as KeyPairUtil, DigestUtil
>and X509CertUtil etc and of Course,I will not change the code
>and the header of them!
>
>Feel ease if I don't plan to abidance by GPL :)  I like Apache
>License only.

If an application contains GPL code then the whole application must be GPL.
Your choices are:

1) to not use any of KeyTool GUI code in your application
2) or to license your application through the GPL.

To do anything else will break the terms of the GPL license that protect
KeyTool GUI - you will be breaking the law.  You can check this for yourself
in the GPL license -
http://www.gnu.org/licenses/gpl.html.  Section 2 b is
the relevant part:

"You must cause any work that you distribute or publish, that in whole or in
part contains or is derived from the Program or any part thereof, to be
licensed as a whole at no charge to all third parties under the terms of
this License."

Basically you are deriving something from KeyTool GUI code that is GPL -
even if you are only using a couple of files they are covered by the GPL
license and anything they are used for must also be GPL as a whole.

If you go ahead and any KeyTool GUI code within your application and do not
license it as GPL then I will be forced to take action.  The reason I chose
GPL as the license was to protect it from being re-licensed.

>The new release of SecureX Eclipse Plugin will all be free but
>i will opensource in the next release becasue the code is too
>bad:(

Again you cannot do this under the terms of the GPL - if you release a GPL
project then the source code must be available.  I believe the same applies
with Apache.

Get in touch if you have any questions.

Cheers,


既然我必须遵循GPL,我只能学微软的肮脏招数——模仿,并且声明我会重写他的所有类,
同时,我明确,China跟USA的国情有所不同,我完全有能力选择Apache License而绕过
源代码创建者的授权(授权我Relicense)。
我的回信如下:

Wayne:
>If you go ahead and any KeyTool GUI code within your application and do not
>license it as GPL then I will be forced to take action. 
I do think there must be some difference between countries, And when worked in
USA, GPL should be respected but what about in Other Countries that have no
law about GPL :)
 
>The new release of SecureX Eclipse Plugin will all be free but
>i will opensource in the next release becasue the code is too
>bad:(
 
What I mean is that i won't released source code that related your Keytool GUI
until I entirely rewrite your util class(KeyPairUtil, DigestUtil and X509CertUtil).
Btw,  I don't think KeyStore 2.X or 3.X can continued well when my free released of
SecureX upgrade to 2.0(now it is 0.9, 1.0 next two week) in which I plan to integrated
more features.
 
Another question:  Should GPL prevent you from released KeyStore 2.4 from KeyTool GUI?
 
Wayne, take it easy,  just Debate promote Understanding and Collaboration......
 
 
Can you tell me which ACTION will you take to?

Wayne的回信让我感到振奋,他提到我的plan work只限制用于于Eclipse,意义不大,并且他说Portcele
和JKeyManager都没有超越过他的工作——KeyStore Explorer。他承认我的工作将会损害他的商业利益,
但他将会迎接这种挑战。最后,他他的观点同样尖锐——不能修改GPL,除非不要使用他的代码。

David,

>I do think there must be some difference between countries, And when worked
>in
>USA, GPL should be respected but what about in Other Countries that have no
>law about GPL :)


I don't want to get into a debate about software licenses and law.  Nobody
is going to sue you no matter what happens - it would serve no purpose.  All
I am asking is that you obey the existing software licenses for my code.  It
is GPL and therefore cannot be relicensed to anything else except by the
copyright holder - that is, me.  Others have created forks of the KeyTool
GUI soure and respected this (for example see, Portecle).  I appreciate that
you have gotten in contact with me about what you are doing.  However, you
did ask for my advice and I have advised you not to break the existing
license.  GPL is still open source so why not use it?

> >The new release of SecureX Eclipse Plugin will all be free but
> >i will opensource in the next release becasue the code is too
> >bad:(
>

>Btw,  I don't think KeyStore 2.X or 3.X can continued well when my
>free released of
>SecureX upgrade to 2.0(now it is 0.9, 1.0 next two week) in which I plan to
>integrated
>more features.

David, others have tired (Portcele, JKeyManger) and none have succeeded in
surpassing my latter work.  I wish you every success with your work but your
prediction of 90% coverage of features is an exaggeration even with your
planned work.  In addition you are limiting your audience by writing a
plug-in for Eclipse.  The bulk of my current users do not even know what
Java is far less Eclipse.  You will get many users I am sure but as for it
hurting my work - more mature efforts have failed.  I do honestly welcome
the challenge - it always inspires me to create new features :)

>Another question:  Should GPL prevent you from released KeyStore 2.4 from
>KeyTool GUI?

As I own the copyright to KeyTool GUI I can decide what license to release
it under.  It is my own work after all :)

>Wayne, take it easy,  just Debate promote Understanding and
>Collaboration......

No problem - I will discuss this with you as long as you require.  I wish
you no ill will - I am simply attempting to protect my open source work.

>Can you tell me which ACTION will you take to?

I hope to take no action.  I am happy for you to build on as much of my open
source work as you like.  I have had no problem with others building on the
old GUI and utility classes - but they did obey the license.  As you say you
only require the use of a couple of crypto utility classes.  All I require
is your agreement that you will license as GPL or not use my code.

I truely hope we can resolve this matter.

Talk to you soon.

Cheers,
- Wayne.


面对Wayne的软硬兼施,我的言辞可能过于刻薄,并且我本人可能对收费软件过于介意,于是
开始回击:

Wanye,
       I do really have two worries:
       1. I hope sofeware is free, GPL's finally object is make more software free and
 opensource is just a measure.  After you make KeyStore Explorer a branch from
 original KeyTool GUI, it is you that firstly not follow the GPL, right? Of course, because
 you are the author, you are the owner, and you'll the authorize yourself to not
 follow.
      2. I checkout the protecle project( http://portecle.sourceforge.net/) which you recommend,
and i started to agree what you said:
->David, others have tired (Portcele, JKeyManger) and none have succeeded in
_>surpassing my latter work.
      Protecle is just KeyTool GUI 1.7 and add only jar sign, little features are added. And
most important, it doesn't provide a native look. What's that mean? It means that when my OS is
using GBK, Protecle and KeyTool GUI 1.7 can not display correctly.
      3. You say that:
-> In addition you are limiting your audience by writing a plug-in for Eclipse.
      I forgot to tell you, that you make are wrong, I am writing SecureX follow the RCP standard
so that it can work as Eclipse Plugin or work stand alone. That means I can let my audience to use
SecureX even they don't have Eclipse installed.
      Please Check : http://wiki.eclipse.org/index.php/Rich_Client_Platform
     4. You suggested that
-> I hope to take no action.  I am happy for you to build on as much of my open
-> source work as you like.  I have had no problem with others building on the
-> old GUI and utility classes - but they did obey the license.  As you say you
-> only require the use of a couple of crypto utility classes.  All I require
-> is your agreement that you will license as GPL or not use my code.
     I must let anyone knows that my purpose is to make software free, and open
is only a sort of means. I always hope that software should not PAY BEFORE USE.
I am worried that follow GPL will let most of my future work serve your KeyStore
Explorer(which is not open or free).
     And when i and my teammates added more features on SecureX, it means that
this RCP framework standarded has enought features, I will open the framework (2.0 version)
so that others can plugin their secure feature into SecureX framework(thty only needed
to follow the RCP Plugin standarded) and they can choose open their source or not(Like
what Eclipse look now) and they can choose free manner or charge manner.
     5, You are worried that my work will hurt you work:
-> You will get many users I am sure but as for it
-> hurting my work - more mature efforts have failed.  I do honestly welcome
-> the challenge - it always inspires me to create new features :)
    I guess you are worried that KeyStore Explorer will turn to use SecureX and your
earning will reduce?
    If that's true, I must get off you worry:
    You can add features to my SecureX framework and not evened to disclose you code(see
RCP Standard above) and make it charge :) My License won't prevent you from charge and won't
require to opensource.
   
    My MSN is : scut_hzq@hotmail.com but i use it rarely.

    Wait for you reply.


Wayne的回信让我感到我在表述GPL的时候有误,我感到有些惭愧,他提到他的KeyStore Explorer不可能
使用我的SecureX(如果我的SecureX被License为GPL),我检查我上面的回信,确实是我写错了,我应该
担心的是GPL让SecureX很难应用于商业用途。

David,

>I do really have two worries:
>1. I hope sofeware is free, GPL's finally object is make more
>software free and
>opensource is just a measure.

If you use the GPL then nobody, including me, can use your work in a
non-open source project - I would have to make my own work GPL - which I
have no intentions of doing.  My current work is closed source and will
remain so.  If you use another open source license such as Apache or MIT
then the opposite is true - such licenses are more liberal when it comes to
commercial uses for software.

>After you make KeyStore Explorer a branch from
>original KeyTool GUI, it is you that firstly not follow the GPL, right? Of
>course, because you are the author, you are the owner, and you'll the
>authorize yourself to
>not follow.

That's correct - only the copyright owner can relicense GPL software.  Note
that that meqans that I cannot relicense any of your work for my purposes.

>I must let anyone knows that my purpose is to make software free, and
>open is only a sort of means. I always hope that software should not PAY
>BEFORE
>USE.

That was my purpose for KeyTool GUI and why I chose the GPL - nobody but me
can relicense it.

>I am worried that follow GPL will let most of my future work serve your
>KeyStore Explorer(which is not open or free).

As I said above I cannot use any GPL code in my work.  By using the GPL your
work will be protected.  In addition I can assure you that I will not even
be looking at your code.

>5, You are worried that my work will hurt you work:

I am not worried.  I welcome the competition.

>     My MSN is : scut_hzq@hotmail.com but i use it rarely.

I have added you to my contacts list and should be online for much of today.

It sounds like we are getting closer to an understanding.  You want to
protect your work and make sure it will always be free for others to use,
right?  The solution appears to be to use the GPL.  Which would be the best
thing to do anyway from a legal standpoint as no licenses would be broken.

Cheers,
- Wayne.


在中国,GPL跟Apache这两种许可证,其实根本没有人去关心,因为大部分人都是用盗版,
谁又会去关心许可证?
我承认我使用了wayne的代码,他写了不少工具类,并且我使用了它们,如果因为GPL阻止
了我选择其他的License,我宁愿违反它。


Wayne后续的邮件我不方便公开,因为我们就license这个问题上翻脸了,Wayne甚至这样说:

I will not be rejoining any open source projects for KeyTool GUI or any
other projects.  Why on earth would I want to give my work away for nothing?
 I think that I have done enough already by writing KeyTool GUI in the
first place.

既然他已经对开源不敢任何兴趣,我又何必再跟他纠缠呢,他继续写他的商业软件,我继续
为我的SecureX添加新的功能,我的目标并不是KeyStore Explorer, 我只是想让更多人能使用
我的SecureX插件更方便地使用Java证书库。

posted on 2006-02-21 13:41 david.turing 阅读(17359) 评论(34)  编辑  收藏

评论

# re: Apache License更适合中国人,正式迎接Wayer Grant的挑战 2006-02-21 15:39 曹晓钢

说老实话,我觉得这件事情上是你做的不对。
特别是这句话:
"我承认我使用了wayne的代码,他写了不少工具类,并且我使用了它们,如果因为GPL阻止了我选择其他的License,我宁愿违反它。"


  回复  更多评论   

# re: Apache License更适合中国人,正式迎接Wayer Grant的挑战 2006-02-21 16:03 scud(飞云小侠)

有空自己就重写了

做事就要地道,否则自己心里不也是不舒服吗 呵呵

gpl就是麻烦  回复  更多评论   

# re: Apache License更适合中国人,正式迎接Wayer Grant的挑战 2006-02-21 16:28 Roger Chen

我也不建议你通过这种方式将这个项目发布成Apache License,实际上除了你受到法律方面的影响外,该项目的使用者也会受到法律上的影响。

但是,如果你的项目并不仅仅局限于Protecle和KeytoolGUI,那么你可以选择将你的项目发布成Apache License,但是不要附带Protecle和KeytoolGUI的任何类库。

作为可选择的一部分,如果项目用户不使用这些库,他们遵照的协议的Apache License;如果使用这些类库,那么他们则须遵照GPL。但是这个选择权在于项目用户,你本身并不承担任何法律风险。  回复  更多评论   

# re: Apache License更适合中国人,正式迎接Wayer Grant的挑战 2006-02-22 08:56 david.turing

谢谢你们的回复,我现在面临的问题是,Keytool GUI仅仅是SecureX的一个子集,我自己还编写了自己的SecureSign(我想将它用于Apache License),它使用了Java证书库,而Keytool Gui仅仅是创建和维护Java证书库,我觉得将Keytool GUI捆绑进SecureX会让我的SecureSign插件变得更容易使用。

我很难接受GPL,这并不是从我本人的角度出发,而是从用户的角度出发,我相信任何中国用户都更喜欢Apache License,我正在研究许可证的涵义,但如果我仅仅是重写Keytool GUI的工具类(如scud所说的),我想我并不难做到这点,但这样做是否合适,是否有违自由软件精神?  回复  更多评论   

# re: Apache License更适合中国人,正式迎接Wayer Grant的挑战 2006-02-23 10:04 曹晓钢

为了避免这种法律问题,应该是完全脱离原来的有冲突的代码。

另外我挺同情原作者的,他没有犯任何错误,实际上也没有什么可以指摘的地方。  回复  更多评论   

# re: Apache License更适合中国人 2006-02-23 10:39 david.turing

老曹,这恰恰是我到现在为止都没有发布SecureX的原因阿,除非我有空改写,否则我不会发布:)还有一个问题想不通,如果一个软件被强行ReLicense,其他人使用了这个Relicense的软件,那责任该是Relicense那人负责还是使用者负责呢?  回复  更多评论   

# re: Apache License更适合中国人 2006-02-23 16:06 曹晓钢

这个...应该是用户没有责任去校验所使用的软件是否被不恰当的relicense的,应该责任是发布者的。但是,sco不是也告过linux的用户的么,他就认为是linux 厂商错误的把它拥有版权的unix代码重新relicense了....  回复  更多评论   

# re: Apache License更适合中国人 2006-02-23 21:10 david.turing

在源代码问题上,Linux世界确实比较极端,但我觉得在OS领域,GPL很值得我们敬仰,我见过很多优秀的程序员,他们定位在GPL之后,并没有ReLicense他们自己的代码,而Wayne将他的软件Relicense成商业软件,并告诉我,惟有他有能力这样做(因为他是原作者),他发布的代码连类名都作了Abfuse,别人跟本不知道他有没有使用了GPL版权的代码(虽然他声称没有,我也相信他没有,但你相信我没有吗?)。  回复  更多评论   

# re: Apache License更适合中国人 2006-03-09 15:36 ShiningRay

以小人之心,度君子之腹  回复  更多评论   

# re: Apache License更适合中国人 2006-10-05 17:32 Compl Yue Still

偶然看到这篇文章。

首先,我对你执意要违反软件原作者意图的努力表示反对,作者拥有其版权,并且选择了自己认为合适的协议发布了软件,这本身是有法律效力的。我想如果别人执意用他自己的理由要求你修改你创造的软件的协议的话,你也不会觉得舒服,更不可能无条件地屈服。

其次,我不知道你是不是在修改这里争论焦点的“Keytool GUI”,的任何代码之后才捆绑在你的SecureX组件里发布的。 如果是这样的话,那么这属于Modification,则必须将修改过的这个版本以GPL协议发布才算合法。 但是如果你并没有修改其中任何东西,而只是将其“捆绑”于你的发行版本之中,那么这个行为并非Modification,而是Redistribution,那么按照GPL,你只需要保证你的用户能够以足够明显核容易的方式获得对应"Keytool GUI"的源代码,那么就没有任何法律冲突,也根本不需要relicense。

即便你对你发行的“Keytool GUI”版本有所修改,你也完全可以选择将这个版本的“Keytool GUI”独立以GPL发布,而你的SecureX照样可以用你喜欢的License(Apache 甚至其他)来发布,商业软件完全可以捆绑GPL软件。

除非你的SecureX事实上是“Keytool GUI”的派生版(Derived Work),也就是说主要是通过对“Keytool GUI”的“修改”来获得的,这种情况下它才需要你如文章中所说这么费劲的跟原作者去争执,否则其实完全没有必要。

原作者确实有以其他协议重新发布软件的权利,在法律上他并不是把已经发布的GPL版本重新发布,而是将他的原始创造内容以新的协议来发布,如果不是这样,那么他的行为也属非法。 而他已经以GPL发布的版本,任何人(包括你)都有权利去进行修改并以GPL重新发布。 但是GPL并不覆盖最初以它发布内容之外的作品内容,所以只要你的SecureX不是从“Keytool GUI”的源码上修改而获得的,而是你自己编写的,那么它就不受随“Keytool GUI”发行的GPL协议控制,而你才是它的原作者,你可以以任何你自己选择的协议进行发行。  回复  更多评论   

# re: Apache License更适合中国人 2007-10-17 17:06 coolpanda

我是在国外一家软件公司,公司的发布的一个软件是免费给非商业使用的(比GPL要严格一些),但是里面用到了一个GPL的第三方软件,现在就遇到这个licence issue. 我的任务就是改用其它licence的类似软件.

因为别人是作者,我对你执意要违反软件原作者意图的努力表示反对.  回复  更多评论   

# re: Apache License更适合中国人 2007-10-17 17:31 coolpanda

顺便说一下,在GPL和apache license 之间还有一个 LGPL, 似乎跟你需要的情况类似,你可以参看一下  回复  更多评论   

# re: Apache License更适合中国人 2008-06-16 07:41 贺伟

fdsfdsfds  回复  更多评论   

# re: Apache License更适合中国人 2008-06-16 07:42 贺伟

gdfsgd  回复  更多评论   

# re: Apache License更适合中国人 2008-11-12 10:49 oldherl

强烈反对你这种执意违反GPL的行为。  回复  更多评论   

# re: Apache License更适合中国人 2008-11-18 16:24 谢火鸟

你他妈的,我就支持GPL,GPL存在就有他的道理,开源就免费么?谁他妈傻了吧叽的,你不想要更多的收入?凭什么我写的东西就免费给别人用?你了解开源吗?了解自由软件和开源的区别吗?随随便便就评论中国人如何,你他妈没这个资格!麻省的爷们都用FreeBSD,你牛、你也FreeBSD得了,别Apache了一步到位!  回复  更多评论   

# re: Apache License更适合中国人 2008-11-18 16:32 谢火鸟

还有,你公开这些信件经过对方同意吗,至少应该改一下名字吧?你这叫什么素质,你啊你 还在这里大放厥词。  回复  更多评论   

# re: Apache License更适合中国人[未登录] 2008-12-18 00:59 James

首先,我想说你的这种执意另选license的做法是严重错误的,这是对GPL开源社区的冒犯,你应该尊重原作者的著作权以及这个社区的意志。当然,你可以寻找Apache License或BSD License等下的替代品,然后重新发布你的产品。你也可以重新实现那个库的功能,但是这种实现不应该是对别人代码的拷贝、重新键入,抄别人的设计。一定要尊重别人的这种文化,GPL主要是为了使自由软件在竞争中不会失去优势,如果商业软件总是可以任意使用自由软件,而自由软件却不能使用商业软件,则自由软件就会处于劣势地位而总是落后。这是GPL所努力营造的一种社区文化,你怎么能因为自己的爱好、利益,违背原作者以及这个社区的意愿呢?  回复  更多评论   

# re: Apache License更适合中国人 2009-01-28 14:30 Jonnie Walker

我只能说你是个地地道道、彻彻底底的法盲!!看看你写的这段话:
"I do think there must be some difference between countries, And when worked in USA, GPL should be respected but what about in Other Countries that have no law about GPL :)"

首先,英美法系采用的是不成文法,根本没有关于GPL、Apache License的law;
其次,GPL和Apache License都是软件许可协议的一种,是软件的著作权所有者与使用者之间的协议,在世界上绝大部分国家都有关于合同的相关法律,在中国必须遵守合同法。

你是自愿使用别人的东西,没有人拿刀架在你脖子上强迫你使用,你就必须要遵守GPL,就像你自愿签了合同当然必须要遵守一样。你现在用了别人的东西、又不想遵守合同,这叫知法犯法。

要中国人都像你这样,别人还真以为中国完全没有法律呢!太丢人了!  回复  更多评论   

# re: Apache License更适合中国人 2009-02-12 16:34 vin

做了婊子还要立牌坊 你这种程序员简直就是祸害  回复  更多评论   

# re: Apache License更适合中国人 2009-04-24 00:55 范德萨范德萨

管他什么GPL,用的操作系统 都还是盗版的

而且电脑里面除了免费软件,没有一样是正版的  回复  更多评论   

# re: Apache License更適合中國人 2009-05-13 23:40 slna

如果你不尊重別人的 License, 那別人也不會尊重你的 License, 那你的 project 選擇用什麼 License 還不是都一樣。  回复  更多评论   

# re: Apache License更适合中国人 2009-06-16 17:47 jigble

我觉得你应该给Wayne回封信表示道歉,你的行为是对原作者的极度不尊重,(虽然我也尊重你的想法,而且我只是个无名小卒,没你那么强的技术),你的执拗让原作者受了伤,你应该为你的行为道歉。也许你的行为多少损害了我们中国人在这方面的形象,你的想法也许没什么不好,但是你的这种行为绝对错误。  回复  更多评论   

# re: Apache License更适合中国人 2010-07-05 09:57 xaverine

我去看了一下GPL的內容
其實GPL是完全的開放(強制性)
也就是只要你使用了GPL的代碼
您就必須要開放"所有"的代碼
包含您的創作
在另一方面Wayne本身也沒有權利將GPL的代碼relicense(就算他是原作者)
您只要使用任何一部分Wayne的source也必須是GPL
您是無法relicense就跟Wayne一樣
  回复  更多评论   

# re: Apache License更适合中国人 2010-09-29 17:11 路人甲

有病。你会不会觉得银行保安系统不顺眼,你就是要去抢银行?
  回复  更多评论   

# re: Apache License更适合中国人[未登录] 2010-12-28 09:36 maple

坦白地说是不是样板戏看多了,不要选择斗争,没有好处的。
你既然是用他的代码就该遵守授权,这是天经地义的。

我个人不看盗版碟片、不用盗版软件:包括操作系统是自己购买的。  回复  更多评论   

# re: Apache License更适合中国人[未登录] 2011-02-03 06:57 ds

丢人。  回复  更多评论   

# re: Apache License更适合中国人 2012-05-19 11:16 dirtyacc@126.com

@ds
同意。这么丢人的事居然还拿出来大书特书,好像自己抗战胜利似得。

还说“他已经对开源没兴趣。。。”,明明是自己不遵守开源协议,这人也有意思,居然还耐着性子回了那么多邮件  回复  更多评论   

# re: Apache License更适合中国人 2012-09-04 14:16 一只程序猿

实在不能理解为何您使用原作者的代码还强硬的想要违背原作者的意愿和GPL,然后还说出宣战这种话,好似取得巨大胜利一般,无法理解!不管是对作者,对法律,对协议,连起码的尊重都没有!  回复  更多评论   

# re: Apache License更适合中国人 2014-07-04 11:19 程序猿

不明白为什么回复都是一片骂声,难度你们修改过GPL的软件都开源了吗?难道你们的windows是正版的?难度你们的VS也是正版的?  回复  更多评论   

# re: Apache License更适合中国人 2014-08-08 17:34 Snoopy

>难道你们修改过GPL的软件都开源了吗?
这不废话么? 等客户把你codebase review出一堆问题, 到时候就麻烦了.
>难道你们的windows是正版的?
当然.
>难度你们的VS也是正版的?
VS是虾米, 编译不是用gcc么?  回复  更多评论   

# re: Apache License更适合中国人 2014-08-08 17:39 Snoopy

而且我很奇怪, Eclipse的插件不是都普遍使用EPL-1.0的license么?  回复  更多评论   

# re: Apache License更适合中国人 2014-10-22 00:09 swordfeng

@Snoopy
这个是好早的文章。。。而且普遍不能代表特殊

再来说说我对作者,和上面一些回复者的看法
你们对GPL的理解有误。

1.原作者有权同时授予一个软件GPL和商业协议,因为他有版权
2.无论是否修改,只要你的程序中带有GPL软件的代码,或者动态链接到GPL软件,你的软件必须以GPL发布
3.LGPL允许任意软件的动态链接

作者的行为毫无疑问是违法,但是中国法律监管……谁都懂  回复  更多评论   

# re: Apache License更适合中国人 2014-12-14 19:49 Hanbin

一大堆口水战,不过毫无意义,无论最终结果如何,只要最后的代码中使用了GPL代码,relicense在法律上仍然是非法无效的,不管吵架有没有吵赢,都改变不了这个法律后果。法律不是双方当事人协商好就能公然违反的,更不可能因其中一方的意志而改变。唯一的方法就是原GPL版权所有人将新软件使用到的代码以另外的协议重新发布。  回复  更多评论   


只有注册用户登录后才能发表评论。


网站导航:
 

导航

统计

常用链接

留言簿(107)

我参与的团队

随笔分类(126)

随笔档案(155)

文章分类(9)

文章档案(19)

相册

搜索

积分与排名

最新随笔

最新评论

阅读排行榜

评论排行榜