On Thu, 2007-06-14 at 19:23 -0600, Theo de Raadt wrote:
I have been throwing around a phrase for a few weeks. Perhaps it
should
be popularized.
OpenBSD is free as in air.
Unfortunately, Richard Stallman beat you to this one by about 24 years.
He never popularized it, but this was one of
On Saturday 16 June 2007, Aaron Hsu wrote:
The BSD-type licenses say that you can redistribute and modify the
code and maybe distribute the software in only binary form, but that
the software and its derivatives must still be licensed under the BSD
license, right?
No. You've got it wrong. If
On 2007-06-15 10:07:36 -0500, J.C. Roberts [EMAIL PROTECTED] said:
Lastly, I realize many people, both developers and users (and me), have
a historical affection for the BSD license but I've always wondered why
code is not placed in the Public Domain rather than being copyrighted
and BSD
On 6/16/07, Aaron Hsu [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
[snip]
Is this the correct interpretation or not?
So far off base, it seems like you haven't even read it.
DS
On 2007-06-16 19:00:23 -0500, Darren Spruell [EMAIL PROTECTED] said:
On 6/16/07, Aaron Hsu [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
[snip]
Is this the correct interpretation or not?
So far off base, it seems like you haven't even read it.
Alright, I guess I must be really misunderstanding what I read.
On 2007/06/16 17:00, Darren Spruell wrote:
On 6/16/07, Aaron Hsu [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
[snip]
Is this the correct interpretation or not?
So far off base, it seems like you haven't even read it.
normal style for OpenBSD code is Permission to use, copy, modify,
and distribute this
On Thursday 14 June 2007, Theo de Raadt wrote:
I propose a new phrase to describe 'Open and Free' projects that
don't approve of OpenBSD's policies because they are 'more
stringent ... than others':
'They aren't free as in speech. They aren't even free as in beer.
They are cheap and
Lastly, I realize many people, both developers and users (and me), have
a historical affection for the BSD license but I've always wondered why
code is not placed in the Public Domain rather than being copyrighted
and BSD licensed? Is the reason for this merely because it's difficult
to
Theo de Raadt wrote:
OpenBSD is free as in air.
Considering that climate change concerns might even make the usage of air in
anyway you like, less viable, OpenBSD might even be more free than air ;)
Jaap
How about The GPL is free as in Gonhorrhea?
Strange how that didn't catch on.
J.C. Roberts wrote:
On Thursday 14 June 2007, Theo de Raadt wrote:
I propose a new phrase to describe 'Open and Free' projects that
don't approve of OpenBSD's policies because they are 'more
stringent ... than
Theo de Raadt wrote:
On 6/13/07, Edd Barrett [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Hi guys,
I have been reading a thread on opensolaris.org regarding the
open-sourcing of 4front's OSS. After explaining why CDDL licensing is
unsuitable for OpenBSD, some of the developers have expressed an
interest to
I propose a new phrase to describe 'Open and Free' projects that don't
approve of OpenBSD's policies because they are 'more stringent ... than
others':
'They aren't free as in speech. They aren't even free as in beer. They
are cheap and easy as in prostitutes.'
I have been throwing
OpenBSD is free as in air.
We'll stick to our principles for reasons entirely
dissasociated from those problems, and noone will ever really
understand.
Because you can.
Because it's there.
Most mortals dare not even attempt.
On 6/13/07, Edd Barrett [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Hi guys,
I have been reading a thread on opensolaris.org regarding the
open-sourcing of 4front's OSS. After explaining why CDDL licensing is
unsuitable for OpenBSD, some of the developers have expressed an
interest to contact Theo regarding
On 6/13/07, Edd Barrett [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Hi guys,
I have been reading a thread on opensolaris.org regarding the
open-sourcing of 4front's OSS. After explaining why CDDL licensing is
unsuitable for OpenBSD, some of the developers have expressed an
interest to contact Theo
15 matches
Mail list logo
