[2lup382_]

> Therein is the great misunderstanding , the GPL was never written for 'companies' , it was and still is for the User.

I didn't say it was, but what it was written for and what it became since writing software has changed so radically are two different things. For example the kernel Linux used to be written primarily by hobbyist hackers, now it is in large part written by $MEGACORP.

> When no one is contributing to the GPL commons the options become more restricted. If one isnt a corp that can write their own library or a 10X coder that can bash it out on their own , leaves the users looking at proprietary solutions or restricted offerings with two tier licences.

Doesn't the progress of FreeBSD (and OpenBSD) fly in the face of that? It only gets better with age, adds new features, and manages to do so while being permissively licensed.

[rzerowan]

Apologies if it came across as accusatory , not the intent. A lot of the people within the ecosystem however view it as such a s the primary beneficiary of corps and individuals an afterthough if at all.

For the BSDs they still have the problem see FreeBSD getting it bits reused by Sony/Apple etc with very littke to show back in terms of code. They do give grants of support however if they solved a code issue that the open code struggles with. It will never see the light of day as their chnages are propreitery as the licensing allown.