141
Let's Try BSD, Part 1 of 7: Introduction (FreeBSD, OpenBSD, NetBSD, DragonFlyBSD) (lowendbox.com)
submitted 2 years ago by to c/linux@lemmy.ml
38 comments fedilink hide all child comments
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] 29 points 2 years ago (1 child)

BSD might be faster but companies choose BSD because the BSD License is much more flexible than the Linux General Public License. Apple was even able to create their own license, the APSL. They would not be able to do that using Linux.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
    •
  • [–] 13 points 2 years ago* (last edited 2 years ago) (1 child)

    While that is true, the question is whether that's a good thing, or not, and for whom.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
    •
  • [–] 10 points 2 years ago*

    It’s a good thing for the owners of the codebase, but often, a bad thing for the community (even if the community contributes to said codebase).

    For example, FOSS maintainers sometimes will (want to) relicense to protect their income stream:

    https://github.com/CaffeineMC/sodium-fabric/issues/2400

    https://github.com/LizardByte/Sunshine/pull/150

    While corporations might literally have maintainers sign away their rights so they can take the work from their own community:

    https://lwn.net/Articles/937369/ (canonical requires a CLA, though this + the subsequent re-license might have happened anyway)

    https://lwn.net/Articles/935592/ (RPM spec files are MIT licensed at the Fedora level. There are likely chnages to RPM files contributed by the community that are now source-restricted in RHEL)

    https://networkbuilders.intel.com/docs/networkbuilders/accelerate-snort-performance-with-hyperscan-and-intel-xeon-processors-on-public-clouds-1680176363.pdf (See section 2.2. Previously, this work was BSD)

    Mixed bag, really.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent