Roy Schestowitz <newsgroups@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> writes:
> __/ [ Donn Miller ] on Monday 25 September 2006 17:35 \__
>
>> Peter KÃhlmann wrote:
>>
>>> And people out there think it is overdoing
>>> I don't like it at all, I think the GPL should stay out of political
>>> questions like DRM or software patents, as bad as those are
>>>
>>> Just recently the kernel maintainers did a poll. None of them was in
>>> favour of the GPL3. Not a single one. They wrote a letter demanding to
>>> drop the GPL3 in its current state
>>>
>>> So, in effect, he linux kernel will *never* be GPL3
>>
>> In fact, I think Linus and the kernel developers would do well to draw
>> up their own license, the Linux License, or some such, which puts forth
>> a bunch of terms for what can and can't be done with the software. Here
>> we'd have a bunch of open source people contributing to their own
>> license. That would be good. Something like the BSDL, except more
>> restrictive like the GPL except perhaps less so would be a good way to
>> go, IMO.
>
> *smile* No more licences! *smile*
>
> There's enough FUD going on /already/, which describes licensing as a maze
> that deteres developers and enterprise adopters. HP has describes the large
> number of licenses as a barrier. It's almost as though the licenses are
> forked as often as the software, which in itself makes the seminal licence a
> GPL'ed project with two many derivatives that follow.
The truest thing you ever said : in other words an uncontrolled mess not
too dissimilar to the proliferation of unsupported "distros".
>
> Best wishes,
>
> Roy
--
How do I type "for i in *.dvi do xdvi i done" in a GUI?
(Discussion in comp.os.linux.misc on the intuitiveness of interfaces.)
|
|