RE: License furor

Perhaps they are referring to the disparity between the passionate
statements about XFree86 and actions taken to adopt XFree86 code anyway.

"XFree86 is evil, but we use their code anyway?"

Clearly, these statements have been made primarily with regard to XFree86
rather than to those who use such terms.

Rich
- one of the evil guys (or so I'm told)

> -----Original Message-----
> From: [email protected] [mailto:[email protected]] On Behalf
> Of Alan Coopersmith
> Sent: Friday, May 21, 2004 6:15 PM
> To: [email protected]
> Subject: Re: [forum] License furor
> 
> William M. Quarles wrote:
> > Here is somehting hypocritical from the X.org release notes:
> >
> > "Due to the new XFree86 1.1 license introduced in XFree86 4.4 (final),
> > later additions to XFree86 may not be incorporated into our codebase."
> >
> > However, later in the release notes, you find this:
> >
> > "This product includes software developed by The XFree86 Project, Inc
> > (http://www.xfree86.org/) and its contributors."
> 
> There is nothing hypocritical in giving credit where it is due while not
> wanting to force others to do the same in the exact fashion prescribed
> by the new license.   I have seen no objections to the license based on
> not wanting anyone to know that the software is from the XFree86 Project -
> just objections to the specific requirements of how to give that credit,
> either because those requirements are believed to conflict with other
> licenses or because of the effort required to ensure compliance with
> terms such as "in the same form and location as other such third-party
> acknowledgments."
> 
> --
> 	-Alan Coopersmith-           [email protected]
> 	 Sun Microsystems, Inc. - X Window System Engineering
> 
> _______________________________________________
> Forum mailing list
> [email protected]
> http://XFree86.Org/mailman/listinfo/forum