Date: Mon, 26 Apr 1999 21:44:09 -0500 (CDT)
From: Michael Rice <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
cc: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sender: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Precedence: bulk
Reply-To: Michael Rice <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
As far as licensing restrictions, look them up. *BSD use a BSD style
license, linux and almost all it's pieces are GPL (the GNU Public
license).
Dunno how far back slashdot keeps articles, but I seem to remember
circa July 1997 that someone wrote a review of various licenses,
discussing their strengths and weaknesses.
Anyhow, from what I remember concerning the GPL Vs. BSD license, the
BSD license requires that the following terms be present and possibly
paraphrased on all references to the software:
# 3. All advertising materials mentioning features or use of this software
# must display the following acknowledgement:
# This product includes software developed by the University of
# California, Berkeley and its contributors.
First of all, do you really want that on the flashy magazine ad for
your new software? And second, imagine that you develop your software
under the BSD license. This software uses library X and compiler Y,
each of which depends on package Z to function. If X, Y and Z are by
different authors and under the BSD license, you have a huge
disclaimer on your ad. I find that pretty damn restrictive. My
personal preference is the Artistic/Perl license, but that's beside
the point. :)
,-----------------------------------------------------------------------------.
> Nolan Darilek | <
> [EMAIL PROTECTED] | University of Texas at Austin <
> [EMAIL PROTECTED] | Freshman, Computer Science <
> ICQ: 15709478 | Orientation Advisor, 1999 <
> http://www.bigfoot.com/~nolan_d/ | <
`-----------------------------------------------------------------------------'
"The lift is being fixed for the next day. During that time we regret that you
will be unbearable."
-Mistranslation in a Bucharest Hotel Lobby
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Send administrative requests to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
