On Sat, May 24, 2008 at 06:23:23PM +0200, Martin Marcher wrote: > Hello, > > How about the python license? Not that I'm really capable of rewriting > and/or patching the pkg_* tools but from a license point of view I > think that the license under which python is distributed is quite > similiar to a BSD license. Especiall this:
So is Perl's artistic licence. gnu/ is a historic accident. It's actually a shorthand for `not bsd' in our tree. Read the Artistic licence, there's nothing that conflicts with the overall goals of OpenBSD. Technically, the Artistic Licence gives you the same rights as a BSD licence. The only thing it prevents you to do is to misrepresent the original software: if you change it, you have to display it prominently, and you can't use the exact same name. Wooo, big infringement on your liberty. Now, compare to the obnoxious GPLv2, or the even more stinky GPLv3. Not the same ballpark. It's a bit like comparing Jimmy Carter to Adolf Hitler. So, let's invoke Godwin's law and close that useless discussion.
