Path: utzoo!utgpu!jarvis.csri.toronto.edu!rutgers!tut.cis.ohio-state.edu!gem.mps.ohio-state.edu!ginosko!uunet!wang!pat From: pat@wang.UUCP (Pat Knight) Newsgroups: comp.lang.c++ Subject: Re: g++ vs. cfront 2.0 in the Real World Summary: libg++ is free, of course you can't sell it Message-ID: <397@wang.UUCP> Date: 13 Jul 89 15:55:49 GMT References: <799@redsox.bsw.com> <6590194@hplsla.HP.COM> Reply-To: pat@wang.UUCP (Pat Knight) Organization: Wang Laboratories Inc, Lowell, Ma Lines: 19 The general complaint about the copyleft applying to libg++ seems to be that you have to copyleft products linking the library. If you think about it, this is wanting to have your cake and eat it. libg++ is free, in the copyleft sense, and in the sense that you can obtain it for no or very low cost. As a developer, you've saved yourself the effort of developing all these neat classes because other people have donated them. That's exactly the way the copyleft is meant to work, in my understanding. Now you want to make money off these classes (as well as your application). Is it reasonable for you to profit from the efforts of others, without giving them anything? I think not. If you want to develop applications to hoard, develop a library to hoard. If you don't want everyone to have to develop a hoardable library, sell a g++ compatible library of your classes (not built from libg++) to other hoarders. Don't complain because FSF won't let you sell THEIR code. Pat Knight (obviously these aren't the opinions of my employer - they sell software)