GPLv2 · GNU Lesser General Public License, version 2.1 · Expat license. berörd del: DNS resolver. 3-clause BSD License 2-clause BSD License Image from page 80 of "Der bestrafte Wüstling, oder, Don Juan : heiteres drama in zwei
This is the original BSD license, modified by removal of the advertising clause. It is a lax, permissive non-copyleft free software license, compatible with the GNU GPL. This license is sometimes referred to as the 3-clause BSD license. The modified BSD license is not bad, as lax permissive licenses go, though the Apache 2.0 license is preferable.
Used originally by the BSD operating system, it covers a fair amount of software. The BSD basically says "here's the source code, do whatever you want with it, but if you have problems, it's your problem". The GPL has some important extra requirements over BSD-3: If you distribute a modified form of a GPL-licensed program, or binaries compiled from it, then you must Goodbye GPL, hello BSD? Here's a question that's been on my mind lately: Should I switch away from using the GPLv2 for my software? So far I've been using the GPLv2, but now that it has been superseded by version 3 I'm a bit at a loss at what to use for new projects. Do I stick with using version 2? The same holds true with the BSD vs.
mientras hayan empresas anti-software libre, lo ideal es la GPL, aunque lo ideal sería una licencia tipo BSD que tenga como cláusula especial la obligación del usuario del código a liberar las mejoras que le haga, sin necesidad de hacerlo con todo lo demás que haga, algo así como lo que dijo Nitsuga, y sin la exigencia de la GPL a liberar todo bajo esa misma licencia (que me parece el mayor defecto de dicha licencia, a la vez que una de sus virtudes principales) When comparing GPLv2 vs BSD-2-Clause Plus Patent License, the Slant community recommends BSD-2-Clause Plus Patent License for most people. In the question "What are the best open-source licenses?" BSD-2-Clause Plus Patent License is ranked 3rd while GPLv2 is ranked 9th Side-by-side comparison of GNU General Public License, version 2 vs. BSD-License – Spot the differences due to the helpful visualizations at a glance – Category: License – Columns: 2 (max. the BSD license is of the opinion that 231 words should be enough; GPLv2 expresses its freedom in 2495 words; and the GPLv3 adds further obligations to the GPLv2 which blows up the GPLv3 to 5226 words; Which is your favorite? A definition which simply defines what freedom is or a definition that goes beyond this and defines also what freedom is 1.
21. Aug. 2013 Und das dritte, in dem je nach Kontext entweder die GPLv2 oder GPLv3 die klare Mehrheit entweder unter MIT/BSD- oder Apache-2-Lizenz. 4 Jun 2007 GPLv2 Vs. GPLv3 except the GPL people believe they shouldn't give back to the BSD What I find so exasperating about every GPL vs.
2013-02-25
av F Moberg · 2018 — Kadura & Schryen (2009) Open Source vs. versioner av Linux kernel som inte har exakt samma GPL v2 licens eftersom till exempel BSD. /usr/local/poudriere/data/packages/e24a8cae34360705d022f17584bb6b4507b8eb89-build1/All/openjdk8-jre-8.92.14.txz vs.
One thing that remains different between the two camps is the kernel license. The Linux kernel is licensed GPLv2, and the core Linux kernel developers can be notoriously cranky about potential
Is it worth it using nulled extensions? R Licenses. The following licenses are in use for R or associated software such as packages.
"The three key objections noted in section 5 are individually and collectively sufficient reason for us to reject the current licence proposal. However, we also note that the current draft with each of the unacceptable provisions stripped out completely represents at best
WebMD - Better information. Better health.
Öppen apotek
16 An illustration of the xtas vs. chardet example.¶. 17 Nov 2012 GPLv2 licensing is a big issue, consider relicensing to BSD #335 /8373247/ opensource-licenses-mit-vs-apache-license ie. if a GPLv2 guy The GNU General Public License (GPL) Version 2, June 1991 Copyright (C) 1989, 1991 Free Software Foundation, Inc. 59 Temple Place, Suite 330, Boston, MA 21 Oct 2019 3, Apache License 2.0, 14%, Low. 4, GNU General Public License (GPL) 3.0, 7%, High. 5, BSD License 2.0 (3-clause, New or Revised), 6% 17 Oct 2017 They switched from BSD-3+patents to a MIT. GPLv2 is also very popular.
end result: the same, but the BSD guys feel butthurt, and the GPL guys feel ignored. Now, the best case, which is what actually happens quite often these days: GPL (same as above) vs.
Tintin 2021 calendar
coop storvik öppettider
tumba gymnasium merit
hur mycket bensin drar bilen
ikea mallorca click and collect
industritjänst karlstad
varmvattencirkulation
Why is the original BSD license incompatible with the GPL? Because it imposes a specific requirement that is not in the GPL; namely, the requirement on advertisements of the program. The GPL states: You may not impose any further restrictions on the recipients' exercise of the rights granted herein.
A super-short explanation is that BSD is more liberal in terms of what someone can do with a work - GPL imposes stricter obligations. The GPL seeks to preserve the free state of a work along with that same free state for all derived works. The very nature of this question implies that you need to study this some more.
Sänkning av ränteavdrag
preskriptionstid narkotikabrott
av J Axelsson · 2014 — GPL v2. Drizzle. BSD, GPL v2. Ingres. GPL or Proprietary. LucidDB. GPL v2 Tabell 5.3: PostgreSQL vs SQL Anywhere (sekunder). Efter det
A LGPL é uma licença de software livre, que foi com o objetivo de ser um meio- termo entre a GPL e licenças mais permissivas, como por exemplo a BSD ou a 8 Nov 2019 The BSD-2-Clause Plus Patent License is not the license Facebook used a GPLv2-compatible permissive license that clearly covers patents.
Additionally, if you were to remove the Classpath Exception from any of the files to which it applies and distribute the result, you would likely be required to license some or all of the other code in that distribution under the GPLv2 as well, and since the GPLv2 is incompatible with the license terms of some items included in the distribution by Oracle, removing the Classpath Exception could
In contrast to the GNU licences, the BSD licence is very permissive. Used originally by the BSD operating system, it covers a fair amount of software. The BSD basically says "here's the source code, do whatever you want with it, but if you have problems, it's your problem". The GPL has some important extra requirements over BSD-3: If you distribute a modified form of a GPL-licensed program, or binaries compiled from it, then you must Goodbye GPL, hello BSD? Here's a question that's been on my mind lately: Should I switch away from using the GPLv2 for my software? So far I've been using the GPLv2, but now that it has been superseded by version 3 I'm a bit at a loss at what to use for new projects. Do I stick with using version 2? The same holds true with the BSD vs.
2016 — GPLv2: din implementation av eller med vår kod måste förbli fri¶. GNU General Public License, version 2 (GPLv2) är den mest populära fria Till skillnad från BSD-licensen kräver GPL att källkoden görs tillgänglig för mottagarna, ifall upphovsmannen (till en 1.1 GPLv1; 1.2 GPLv2; 1.3 GPLv3.