Re: The impact of a module's license on the requiring Lua program

[Alexander Gladysh <agladysh@...>]

On Thu, Apr 12, 2012 at 11:10, Alexander Gladysh <agladysh@gmail.com> wrote:
> On Wed, Apr 11, 2012 at 23:31, Dimitris Papavasiliou <dpapavas@gmail.com> wrote:
>> What I didn't understand initially
>> was why it was somehow self-evident that I should release the code I write
>> in my spare time, a practice that takes up much of it, and for which I do
>> not ask to get payed but share publicly for whatever use it may be to others
>> (programmers and end-users alike), why I should release this code in such a
>> way that others can make money off it.  I do not mean to say that making
>> money off your work is bad but the whole concept seemed rather unreasonable
>> to me.
>
> Give, and it shall be given unto you?
>
> For example, we do use many opensource libraries commercially. But we
> try to do our part in sharing our stuff back (under MIT!) and
> sponsoring some of the Lua-related opensource projects.

Accidentally sent that before I finished, sorry.

What I mean is that being more open is generally better in the case of
software. Well, at least as long as you follow the GitHub principle:
share what is good for everyone, don't share what is good only for
your competitors.

Not everyone just grabs other's work and sit on it. If you use
opensource, sooner or later you'll grow up and start share stuff back.
(Well, maybe unless you're some big ugly corporation, but you really
can't do much with that, even if you GPL-ed the code.)

Alexander.