Re: License furor

Paul Vojta <[email protected]>
Newsgroups gmane.comp.xfree86.forum
Message-ID <[email protected]>
On Tue, May 25, 2004 at 01:29:25PM -0400, William M. Quarles wrote:
> Paul Vojta wrote:
> > I've reread this thread just now, and I don't see the Inquirer mentioned
> > at all.  In fact, "grep -i inquir 2004-May.txt" doesn't find anything
> > either.
> 
> Then it's on the Fedora thread, I apologize.
> <http://www.theinquirer.net/?article=14511>

OK, I've read that article, but it offers nothing new, just a recounting
of facts as I already knew them.  In short, the facts don't speak for
themselves, or at least (by themselves) they don't lead to a conclusion
that there's anything wrong with x.org.  The xf86 1.1 license adds a
new type of condition that has not been used in open source licenses
before, and I see nothing wrong with them not wanting to be bound by
that condition.

-- 
Paul Vojta, [email protected]
lmpx.com only provides a reader for public news (NNTP) servers. It is not affiliated with the servers or forums shown here and is not responsible for the content of articles, which is written by their respective authors.