I am not entirely sure why the GPLv2 license wouldn’t work for the BSDs, but either way I doubt that the problem was so big that it really required a license change. Everything in life is a trade-off, and I think the trade-off of not supporting the BSDs to prevent potential bad faith actors from “stealing the code without attribution” is a really bad trade-off.
I understand that the licenses are different. What I dont understand is why the BSD operating systems cannot make use of Asahi if it is GPL licensed instead of MIT licensed.
Because, as the comment you’re replying to says, if they include any GPL code, the whole combined work has to be licensed as GPL, and the BSD operating systems don’t want to be GPL.
I haven’t replied because I don’t know the precise details of why they can’t but Linux could, so was hoping someone else would answer, but it’s been a whole day, so I guess we’re both left not knowing.
I suspect it might not even be anything like that and just be that the BSD maintainers don’t want to rely on any GPL code for anything, even if it’s optional.
I am not entirely sure why the GPLv2 license wouldn’t work for the BSDs, but either way I doubt that the problem was so big that it really required a license change. Everything in life is a trade-off, and I think the trade-off of not supporting the BSDs to prevent potential bad faith actors from “stealing the code without attribution” is a really bad trade-off.
The GPL is a copyleft license. Derivative and combined works must be published under the same license.
You can use BSD with GPL and then publish as GPL, but you can not publish as BSD.
I understand that the licenses are different. What I dont understand is why the BSD operating systems cannot make use of Asahi if it is GPL licensed instead of MIT licensed.
Because, as the comment you’re replying to says, if they include any GPL code, the whole combined work has to be licensed as GPL, and the BSD operating systems don’t want to be GPL.
What if they just do like linux distroes did with closed source drivers for a longtime?
I haven’t replied because I don’t know the precise details of why they can’t but Linux could, so was hoping someone else would answer, but it’s been a whole day, so I guess we’re both left not knowing.
My guess is that they do not ship them inside the OS but let you install them with or after
I suspect it might not even be anything like that and just be that the BSD maintainers don’t want to rely on any GPL code for anything, even if it’s optional.