@fristi @Paradox >he just liked the core part of the gplv2, that is, share your code and get something back for it.
That is not a core part - that is just a side effect.

Yes, generally if a vendor at least partially complies with the GPLv2-only, the terrible code can be shared from the end user of the software, to a developer, cleaned up and mainlined and everyone benefits.

The core goal of the GPLv2, is that the user gets the 4 freedoms - which of course includes installation information for the software, not just source code that can be cleaned up and used on some other computer.

Another side effect of the GPLv2-ambigious is that Linux changing from a proprietary license to a free license encouraged the GNU developers to port every last GNU package to work with Linux - meaning that people were given a reason to try his kernel.

Thousands of people then installed some release of GNU/Linux and saw how broken things were and determined that the GNU software was fine - just that Linux needed a lot of improvements to not limit the GNU experience - which attracted thousands of developers to work on Linux.

Linus of course betrayed this good will by approving for Linux to become proprietary software again in 1996, with the inclusion of the first (of mostly) proprietary software, without source code.

Linus has stated that he does not care about the users freedom's being restricted - he's okay with fraudster companies to infringe his license via selling hardware that integrates GPLv2 software, including Linux and also refusing to provide installation information for the GPLv2 software.

>But beyond that he never in particular cared for open source software development.
The GPLv2 was published in 1991 - it is a *free software* license.

The "open source" development model and definition came much later; 1998.

Linus has now explicitly stated that he hates free software - but that was not hard to work out, considering his long history of hating freedom.

>I think people should be made more aware of the fact that linus was never the face of the gpl, open source development or any particularly linked idea or view. He is simply the kernel guy.
As it's named after Linus+x, "Linux" spreads Linus's worldview - it's ludicrous to state that it doesn't have any conceptional links.

Linus worldview is that any ruinous compromise or perceived short term convenience is worth it, as long as sometimes, more popularity of his worldview results.

Linus really doesn't like the GNU worldview that the users deserve freedom and also how you only get real convenience without *any* proprietary software.