From owner-freebsd-arch Tue Jul 11 7: 4: 4 2000 Delivered-To: freebsd-arch@freebsd.org Received: from ns1.sunesi.net (ns1.sunesi.net [196.15.192.194]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id B3BBB37C067; Tue, 11 Jul 2000 07:03:49 -0700 (PDT) (envelope-from nbm@sunesi.net) Received: from nbm by ns1.sunesi.net with local (Exim 3.03 #1) id 13C0dI-0002Q8-00; Tue, 11 Jul 2000 16:03:32 +0200 Date: Tue, 11 Jul 2000 16:03:32 +0200 From: Neil Blakey-Milner To: Darren Henderson Cc: David O'Brien , arch@FreeBSD.ORG, papowell@astart.com Subject: Re: Bringing LPRng into FreeBSD? - License Issues Message-ID: <20000711160332.A9080@mithrandr.moria.org> References: Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii X-Mailer: Mutt 1.0.1i In-Reply-To: ; from darren@nighttide.net on Tue, Jul 11, 2000 at 09:45:48AM -0400 Organization: Sunesi Clinical Systems X-Operating-System: FreeBSD 3.3-RELEASE i386 X-URL: http://rucus.ru.ac.za/~nbm/ Sender: owner-freebsd-arch@FreeBSD.ORG Precedence: bulk X-Loop: FreeBSD.ORG On Tue 2000-07-11 (09:45), Darren Henderson wrote: > I can understand that and even sympathize with the idea. However, adding > software to the standard distribution that doesn't share the same license > of most of that distribution is a bad thing. What a pain it would be if > there were dozens of slight BSD license variations. There are dozens of slight BSD license variations already. Not to mention Beerware, Artistic, GPL, Less License, not to mention dual-licenses, and other weirdness. I've mailed Patrick privately to suggest the variation be slightly adjusted such that, like the Artistic license, only if the software _claims_ to be LPRng, shall it require the change. If you're on an embedded platform or one-box solution, noone is going to say 'lpc -V', and if you say 'LPRng inside!', you need simply qualify it by saying "With local modifications for this platform". If you're on a commercial off-shoot of FreeBSD, you can either use it verbatim, or make local changes, and qualify it simply be 'With local modifications for FooBSD' in lpc -V. If you're using the code for something that isn't LPRng, you needn't do anything, and can subsequently use the code under a standard two-clause BSD license. I assume that's sufficient for everyone? Are you amenable to this, Patrick? Neil -- Neil Blakey-Milner Sunesi Clinical Systems nbm@mithrandr.moria.org To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-arch" in the body of the message