Re: [OT] Noticia: Ubuntu dice adiós para siempre a GNU/Linux
hubble <[email protected]>
| Newsgroups | gmane.linux.debian.user.spanish |
|---|---|
| Message-ID | <[email protected]> |
On Thu, 27 Mar 2025 17:29:19 +0000 Esteban Monge <[email protected]> wrote: > > > > Al menos eso es lo que se leía en los grupos de noticias por aquella época. > No se donde viste eso, pero las declaraciones de Torvalds te > contradicen, y lo cito, en inglés: > "So that original copyright license was just me writing things up, there > was pretty obviously no actual lawyerese or anything there. > > The two important parts were the "full source has to be available" and > "no money may be involved". The note about copyright notices was because > I tended to hate the copyright boilerplate verbiage at the top of every > single source file, so I knew there weren't all that many notices > scattered in the sources themselves. > > The "no money" part came about because I had been annoyed with (being a > rather poor student) having to pay something like $169 USD for Minix, > and that had been a fair amount of money to me. I felt that part of the > point was to make something available to others in my situation, and > that it really should be "free" in the actual money sense. > > So for me, "free" as in "gratis" was actually an earlier concern than > the whole "free as in freedom". I still happen to believe that being > available even if you're a poor person who really doesn't have any money > at all is at least as important as anything else, because that's a basic > availability issue for many people." > > Luego agrega que el cambio de licencia fue porque, lo cito de nuevo, en > ingles: > "Part of it was also because I felt that the availability of gcc was > very important to the project, so picking the GPLv2 as a homage to gcc > was appropriate. > > Put another way: I still think that the availability issue is very > important. But I think the GPL makes that a non-issue in practice, so > making the license to be about the money side is pointless. And clearly > _allowing_ the commercial side has been a very good thing for > everybody." > > Entonces nadie obligó a Torvalds, simplemente lo hizo como un homenaje a > la licencia del GCC y porque quería eliminar la restricción de uso > comercial que tenía el kernel original, además de que pensó que la GPL > garantizaba que Linux podía seguir siendo gratis. > > Fuente: > https://www.datacenterknowledge.com/business/linus-torvalds-on-early-linux-history-gpl-license-and-money > -- hubble <[email protected]>