>But the whole press_world (and readers/communities) will continue to >bitch OpenSolaris, if it is not - somehow - licensed under GPL.n >Whether anybody (who isn't a lawyer) understands the details, or not.
That's what I don't agree with; they'll bit it's not under the GPL and then they'll bitch it's not under GPLv2. (The one true GPL) Let them bitch. >Remember XFree vs. Xorg: >http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/XFree86#Licensing_controversy >Question: Which distribution of whatever UNIX/lin-UX has not moved to Xorg? >They all have neglected XFree ... Completely irrelevant to the discussion at hand; XFree86 added an advertising clause; that is unacceptable to many. It is kinda strange that the FSF feels so strongly about this; afterall, after the terms and conditions they include the following in the file COPYING: If the program is interactive, make it output a short notice like this when it starts in an interactive mode: Gnomovision version 69, Copyright (C) year name of author Gnomovision comes with ABSOLUTELY NO WARRANTY; for details type `show w'. This is free software, and you are welcome to redistribute it under certain conditions; type `show c' for details. Casper _______________________________________________ opensolaris-discuss mailing list [email protected]
