Re: orbs.org accuses qmail of mailbomb relaying!

[Michael T. Babcock]

You are free to tell me where I was supposed to agree to a license agreement
before downloading it and/or where the LICENSE file is and/or where the license
is embedded in C source files ...

"Nathan J. Mehl" wrote:

> In the immortal words of Michael T. Babcock ([EMAIL PROTECTED]):
> > No offense to DJB at all, but you have a very strange view of open sourced
> > software if you don't believe in using patches.
>
> One last time.
>
> Qmail is not "open source software".  Is not now.  Has never been.  In
> all probability never will be.
>
> You can reasonably maintain that this is not a good thing.  (Heck, I'd
> agree with you.)  You can argue that qmail would benefit from an OSS
> development model.  (You might be right.)  But understand that you are
> talking about a hypothetical: qmail is _not_ OSS.  And it seems to me
> that a great deal of your confusion on this list stems from your
> misapprehension of this fact.