On Mon, 30 Jun 2003, Edmund GRIMLEY EVANS wrote: > Matthew Palmer <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>: > > > If the author had accepted patches from others to version 1, he would be > > stuck with keeping later versions under the GPL unless he got a licence > > change OK'd by each of the contributors, or removed the contributed code. > > However, check the licence on the reiserfs stuff: Hans Reiser' writes > something to the effect that if you send him stuff he will assume you > are licensing him to do what he wants with it, including use it in > non-free releases, unless you say otherwise.
Yes, but his software is not licenced under the GPL. > > Note that, if the code was removed and re-written, the original author > > would have to be very careful, because he would be 'tainted' by > > knowledge of the original implementation. > > People sometimes really exaggerate this "taintedness" doctrine. People sometimes make pointless remarks. -- ----------------------------------------------------------------------- #include <disclaimer.h> Matthew Palmer, Geek In Residence http://ieee.uow.edu.au/~mjp16
