Re: License furor

Alan Coopersmith wrote:
> 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."
> 

You're misunderstanding me.  I'm pointing to X.org as being 
hypocritical, not XFree86.  Read my message again.