Re: License furor

Marc Aurele La France <[email protected]>
Newsgroups gmane.comp.xfree86.forum
Message-ID <[email protected]>
On Thu, 27 May 2004, William M. Quarles wrote:

> > But the saddest thing about all this brouhaha isn't that this assertion was
> > ever made, nor its consequences, nor how it is supported, nor that many have
> > been hood-winked into believing and promoting it, and nor even that similar
> > noise isn't being made about certain other licenses in the source tree.

> You're right about the other licenses on the source tree.  Is there any
> way that we could contact the authors who wrote code under the original
> BSD license and get the code relicensed?

What would that fix?  Nothing at all.  Even "sacrosanct" Debian has distributed
code under these licenses for years.  So, why would these authors relicense
their code?  Because, 1.1, a "weaker" license than theirs, is now deemed
unacceptable?  Yeah right...

No, compatibility with the GPL, or any other license for that matter, is
irrelevant here.  It's just a smokescreen to tie up idle minds.

Marc.

-
Marc Aurele La France
XFree86 developer and VP.  ATI driver and X server internals.
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.