My apologies. I meant no offense.
Christopher Mahan wrote:
--- [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
But isn't (a) cdrecord GPL fork, (b) Debian nonacceptance of CDDL
projects and (c) FSF/GNU anti-CDDL statements not considered as a
CDDL
failure proofs?
No; it only proves that if we dual license that Debian (you?) will
fork a GNU only version.
The anti CDDL statements are statements of bigots and as such not
interesting.
Casper,
from http://www.fsf.org/licensing/licenses/, about CDDL:
This is a free software license which is not a strong copyleft;
it has some complex restrictions that make it incompatible with the
GNU GPL. It requires that all attribution notices be maintained,
while the GPL only requires certain types of notices. Also, it
terminates in retaliation for certain aggressive uses of patents. So,
a module covered by the GPL and a module covered by the CDDL cannot
legally be linked together. We urge you not to use the CDDL for this
reason.
Also unfortunate in the CDDL is its use of the term "intellectual
property".
Their rationale is explained.
I would personally prefer if you were able to refrain from calling
people like myself who use and advocate Debian as "bigots" as the
term bears negative connotations and is not entirely conducive to
civil and measured discussion. As an alternative, I suggest
"strong-willed". Thanks in advance.
Chris Mahan
818.943.1850 cell
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
http://www.christophermahan.com/
____________________________________________________________________________________
Yahoo! Music Unlimited
Access over 1 million songs.
http://music.yahoo.com/unlimited
--
Stephen Harpster
Director, Open Source Software
Sun Microsystems, Inc.
_______________________________________________
opensolaris-discuss mailing list
[email protected]
