Banning GPL articles

Anthony Mushrow

You mean only have code that comes with no license at all? Hmm... perhaps. But if somebody had a project that others could benefit from by posting it with an article, yet they didn't want people to just take their code and use it (rather, that they learn from it and develop their own code)... :confused: I'm gonna just say 3 ;P

My current favourite word is: PIE! Good ol' pie, it's been a while.

Judah Gabriel Himango

How many current articles use GPL licensed code? If I had to make a choice, I'd ban GPL code just to irk those high-horse techno zealots that whine whenever something isn't GPL. :)

Tech, life, family, faith: Give me a visit. I'm currently blogging about: The Lord Is So Good The apostle Paul, modernly speaking: Epistles of Paul Judah Himango

Lost User

GPL, in my opinion, violates the submission guidelines: If you post to CodeProject then you retain copyright of your article and code. You also give CodeProject permission to use it in a fair manner and also permit other developers to use the sourcecode associated with your articles in their own applications as long as they do not remove your copyright notices or try and take credit for your work. GPL is not compatible with this statement IMO. I vote for NO GPL code. Cheers, Drew.

Mel Padden

Excuse my ignorance - I'm unfamiliar with the various licences and the differences between them. Is GPL the licence that comes with libs like NUnit and Log4net? Does this mean that if for instance I posted something that used as part of the solution, code from a free library like NUnit, it would be rejected? Would it depend on whether the article based itself on the code, i.e. took the concepts and hard work that had gone into it and changed them a little, or if it simply used them as part of an overall solution, say off the top of my head, using log4net as a part of a web development framework? (If that's a valid comparison) ? I'd be of the opinion that if there's a component to do something which is peripheral to the main content of the article, then isn't it only logical to write the article on the basis of the way you would develop in a production scenario, i.e. get the best tool for the job and get on with it? Again, excuse my ignorance, just raising the question. Doubtless there are less legally-minded members of CP who would likewise benefit from an informed response.

Smokie, this is not 'Nam. This is bowling. There are rules.

Christopher Duncan

As a compromise, should one be desirable, you might make the liscense a category for the posts, allowing people to search for code by license type. This would allow people to filter out GPL should they so desire, while keeping the articles available should others want to view them for tutorial purposes (or be willing to adhere to the terms of the GPL).

Christopher Duncan Author of The Career Programmer and Unite the Tribes Coming soon: Got a career question? Ask the Attack Chihuahua! www.PracticalUSA.com

Judah Gabriel Himango

I can already see the Slashdot headline:

Top Windows Developer Site Bans GPL Code Rumors have it that site owner is sleeping with Bill Gates. Also, he is the spawn of Satan. Bribery suspected. Stallman and Moglen planning legal action.

Tech, life, family, faith: Give me a visit. I'm currently blogging about: The Lord Is So Good The apostle Paul, modernly speaking: Epistles of Paul Judah Himango

Ravi Bhavnani

Drew Stainton wrote:

I vote for NO GPL code.

I vote for modifying the submission guidelines. One could still learn by reading an article whose code is bound by a GPL. /ravi

This is your brain on Celcius Home | Music | Articles | Freeware | Trips ravib(at)ravib(dot)com

Ravi Bhavnani

Christopher Duncan wrote:

while keeping the articles available should others want to view them for tutorial purposes (or be willing to adhere to the terms of the GPL).

Exactly! /ravi

This is your brain on Celcius Home | Music | Articles | Freeware | Trips ravib(at)ravib(dot)com

leppie

Is it April in Canada already? ;P Sometimes your work is forced to be GPL due to GPL dependencies.

xacc.ide
IronScheme a R5RS-compliant Scheme on the DLR
The rule of three: "The first time you notice something that might repeat, don't generalize it. The second time the situation occurs, develop in a similar fashion -- possibly even copy/paste -- but don't generalize yet. On the third time, look to generalize the approach."

toxcct

Why ?! :confused:

[VisualCalc][Binary Guide][CommDialogs] | [Forums Guidelines]

Nemanja Trifunovic

I would say we shouldn't host any GPL code at CodeProject, since it is clearly not compatible with the spirit of this community. However, if there is an article with a link to GPL code hosted i.e. at SourceForge, I say let's allow it. Many articles are useful without the code.

Programming Blog utf8-cpp

toxcct

sorry for my ignorance about all these license things, but in what is it not compatible with CP' spirit ?

[VisualCalc][Binary Guide][CommDialogs] | [Forums Guidelines]

Mike Hankey

Good eye! (Good observation) Mike

Life is not measured by the number of breaths we take, but by the moments that take our breath away. "George Carlin"

Shog9 0

Bad idea. Yeah, right now, there are a lot of articles that are more "article" than "code", and it's more of an irritation than anything. But if you ever want to make this a nicer place for on-going projects, GPL is a must.

----

...the wind blows over it and it is gone, and its place remembers it no more...

Colin Angus Mackay

Personally, I regard GPL as a virus licence. I don't like it as it is effectively authoritarian and doesn't fit with the idea of community. As an Open Source licence I would say that FreeBSD is the one that fits community best.