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]>
lmpx.com only provides a reader for public news (NNTP) servers. It is not affiliated with the servers or forums shown here and is not responsible for the content of articles, which is written by their respective authors.