Hi, i'm not replying to the trolls (or their off-topic rants) in this thread, and i'm not spamming other project's lists. Instead, i'd merely like to clarify a point that is actually on topic on this list, to avoid that users get confused by FUD.
One of the trolls wrote: > A gratuitous license, absent an attached interest, is revocable at will. > This goes for GPLv2 as used by linux, just as it goes for the BSD > license(s). That is not what /usr/share/misc/license.template means, and i'm sure all OpenBSD developers are aware of that. The OpenBSD website makes the meaning very explicit: https://www.openbsd.org/policy.html [...] Finally, releases are generally binding on the material that they are distributed with. This means that if the originator of a work distributes that work with a release granting certain permissions, those permissions apply as stated, without discrimination, to all persons legitimately possessing a copy of the work. That means that having granted a permission, the copyright holder can not retroactively say that an individual or class of individuals are no longer granted those permissions. Likewise should the copyright holder decide to "go commercial" he can not revoke permissions already granted for the use of the work as distributed, though he may impose more restrictive permissions in his future distributions of that work. Yours, Ingo
