Date: Thu, 7 Jun 2001 01:59:20 -0400 From: "William Wong" <willwong@samurai.com> To: "Brian Behlendorf" <brian@collab.net>, "Gordon Tetlow" <gordont@bluemtn.net> Cc: "Thomas T. Veldhouse" <veldy@veldy.net>, <freebsd-stable@FreeBSD.ORG> Subject: Re: IPFilter licence update Message-ID: <002201c0ef16$ff0042a0$0300a8c0@anime.ca> References: <Pine.BSF.4.31.0106062215520.1996-100000@localhost>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
Not sure if this was mentioned on this thread, but it looks like a commit was made recently which moved ipfilter into contrib. - Will ----- Original Message ----- From: "Brian Behlendorf" <brian@collab.net> To: "Gordon Tetlow" <gordont@bluemtn.net> Cc: "Thomas T. Veldhouse" <veldy@veldy.net>; <freebsd-stable@FreeBSD.ORG> Sent: Thursday, June 07, 2001 1:21 AM Subject: Re: IPFilter licence update > On Wed, 6 Jun 2001, Gordon Tetlow wrote: > > I removed Darren from the CC list as I don't think he really needs to be > > in on this discussion.... > > > > On Mon, 4 Jun 2001, Thomas T. Veldhouse wrote: > > > > > While meaning no disrespect to Darren with this followup. What good does a > > > signed memorandum with FreeBSD do if I decide at some point (which I won't) > > > to take the FreeBSD source and branch it into my own variant? This is how > > > the various BSDs came about in the first place. It does seem rather > > > restrictive of a license for the FreeBSD core system. Why can't this be > > > released under the BSD license? > > > > <abestos_suit> > > It's not released under a BSD license because he doesn't want to. His > > perogative. We have some much more restrictive licenses (ie GPL) in the > > base OS and no one complains about them. > > </abestos_suit> > > Wait, I'm confused. I thought the resolution was that the ipfilter code > that was a part of FreeBSD was under the standard BSD license like > everything else under /usr/src (aside from /usr/src/gnu), and that > Darren's no-redistribution-of-modifications clause applied to > non-"release" versions of the software, i.e. beta releases, etc, the > implication being that once released, it'd be put under a BSD license and > then integrated into FreeBSD. Is that not the case? > > If not, that's pretty bad - it means that you can't really say anymore > that 'FreeBSD is under the BSD license, aside from some GNU bits', you > have to say 'FreeBSD is under a multitude of licenses, some of them not > open source, please examine all source code files for potential licenses > before redistributing'. That would suck. > > Frankly, Darren's "no modified versions may be redistributed" > "clarification" is much worse than even the GPL. But I'll avoid > recrossing well-covered ground. > > Brian > > > > > To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org > with "unsubscribe freebsd-stable" in the body of the message > To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-stable" in the body of the message
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?002201c0ef16$ff0042a0$0300a8c0>