On 2 Aug 2016, at 11:12 AM, Eggert, Lars <lars(_at_)netapp(_dot_)com> wrote:
If you define the efforts of this standards body as one to produce BSD
licensed code (which is basically the case), it will continue to lag
behind the bleeding edge and continue to become more and more
irrelevant.
I guess we're getting on our soap boxes at this point? :-)
But I don't define "the efforts of this standard body" in this way. I remain
convinced that textual specs are required. Code is a nice addition, but
really only useful if it can be rather freely used - which GPL code can’t.
I’m going to join a few others in pushing back against this statement. FWIW I
work for a closed-source vendor, so while I can copy BSD license code into my
code-base, GPL (any flavor) is problematic.
Still, I think any source code I can see is useful to me as an implementer. If
I need to incorporate something into my code then either it’s really small
(like a hash function) or I need to rewrite it anyway to fit. Either way I am
likely to end up re-implementing quite a bit. Having a reference implementation
is incredibly useful in getting my code to work correctly.
Yoav