Re: "toll-free bridging"

[strobe anarkhos]

> > > > Can GNUStep use Apple's "Core Foundation"?
> > >
> > >I don't think so. See <http://www.gnu.org/philosophy/apsl.html> for  
> > >details.
> > 
> > Just because Core Foundation is licensed under the APSL doesn't mean you 
> > can't link against it. 
> > The restriction is the other way around. You can use APSL code as you
> > wish, just don't expect all changes you make (if any) to be rolled back
> > into Darwin.
> > 
> > As far as the FSF, their line is if it isn't GNU it's BAD. They're very 
> > political.
> > 
>
>I had precisely tried to avoid this topic to avoid the flamewar.

Flamewar? Huh?!

>
>I don't like the APSL and won't contribute a single comma of code to
>projects under that license - *ever*.  If you are happy with the
>restrictions they put, it probably means you don't contribute any code,
>otherwise the fact that a huge greedy corporation is just taking your code
>and your work for free in the way Apple does and with the arrogance they
>show, would bother you quite a lot.

Have you read the APSL 1.2? I have.

The only restriction is they can use your modifications without royalty. This 
restriction doesn't even apply in this case because you don't need to modify 
Core Foundation.

There is no restriction to using any APSL code except you must include a copy 
of the licence. You can static link any APSL code into a binary and sell that 
binary so long you give Apple credit for the APSL code and your code doesn't 
modify the APSL code. If it does all you have to do is publish those 
modifications. It's less restrictive than the LGPL.

>The FSF might be political, but they believe in what they say, they give
>anyone the same rights they have for themselves, and what they want is to
>make the world better - not to squeeze money out of other people's
>pockets.  Which btw doesn't mean they stop other people from creating
>succesful businesses basing on FSF free software.

There is no way Apple could possibly squeeze money out of your pocket if you 
chose to use APSL code. That's pure FUD on your part.

For a change how about reading the license, or would you consider that a flame?