[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: Octave C++ performance benchmarks?
From: |
Jordi Gutiérrez Hermoso |
Subject: |
Re: Octave C++ performance benchmarks? |
Date: |
Sun, 27 Jul 2008 09:18:17 -0500 |
2008/7/24 John W. Eaton <address@hidden>:
> I'm not saying that you can't do what you want to do (assuming that it
> in fact does not violate the terms of the GPL).
It doesn't. Which is why the AGPL exists. If this usage of Octave is
contrary to what you believe free software should be about, then
perhaps you should consider placing Octave on the AGPL. The two
licenses are almost the same in their operative clauses, the big
difference is clause 13 of the AGPL. I just diff'ed the two licenses,
other than clause 13 of the AGPL, they're nearly identical except for
the preamble and other explanatory sections.
- Jordi G. H.
- Re: Octave C++ performance benchmarks?, (continued)
- Re: Octave C++ performance benchmarks?, Jaroslav Hajek, 2008/07/22
- Message not available
- Re: Octave C++ performance benchmarks?, John W. Eaton, 2008/07/24
- Re: Octave C++ performance benchmarks?, Kyusik Chung, 2008/07/24
- Re: Octave C++ performance benchmarks?, John W. Eaton, 2008/07/24
- Re: Octave C++ performance benchmarks?, Kyusik Chung, 2008/07/24
- Re: Octave C++ performance benchmarks?, John W. Eaton, 2008/07/24
- Re: Octave C++ performance benchmarks?,
Jordi Gutiérrez Hermoso <=
- Re: Octave C++ performance benchmarks?, Jaroslav Hajek, 2008/07/24
- Re: Octave C++ performance benchmarks?, Kyusik Chung, 2008/07/25
- Re: Octave C++ performance benchmarks?, Jordi Gutiérrez Hermoso, 2008/07/27
- Re: Octave C++ performance benchmarks?, Søren Hauberg, 2008/07/27