Slashdot Mirror

← Back to Domains

Domain: beopen.com

Stories and comments across the archive that link to beopen.com.

Comments · 4

  1. Python 1.6 is GPL-incompatible, and it's a pity... by bdr · · Score: 1 · on Python 1.6 Incompatible w/ GPL

    Guido van Rossum pretty much wanted a BSD-style license, but CNRI didn't agree. AFAIK, everybody in the BeOpen Pythonlabs team wants a GPL-compatible license.

    The only objection of RMS is against clause 7, the "State of Virginia"-clause. The strange thing is, this clause may not be applicable outside the US, so the license may be GPL-compatible outside the US after all. (Only lawyers can sort this out).
    (See http:// mailman.beopen.com/pipermail/license-py20/2000-Sep tember/000073.html.)

    Perhaps some European lawyer could look at the clause (SuSE? RedHat Europe?). Maybe CNRI could be persuaded to drop the clause if it's void in the rest of the world (good) (or maybe they would append a ton of legalese to the license (bad)).

  2. Re:GPL Compatibility issues (slightly OT). by jhylton · · Score: 3 · on Python 1.6 Final Released

    The Python 1.6 License FAQ may clarify some of these issues for you. CNRI owns the code that Guido and I and our co-workers wrote at CNRI -- and they have decided to release Python 1.6 with a license that RMS has an issue with.

    The specific issue is that RMS believes that the clause in the Python license that says the contract is governed by the laws of Virginia is incompatible. The lawyers are still working on this one...

    You can find even more information in the license-py20 mailing list archive. The most recent post from Bob Weiner, BeOpen's CTO, says:

    We are doing a lot of work at BeOpen with CNRI to get them to allow the GPL as an alternative license across the CNRI-derived parts of the codebase. Bob Kahn of CNRI seems to dislike the GPL so he has been against doing this as part of a CNRI release but potentially has been amenable to allowing it to be done by BeOpen in a derivative release. We shall see in the next week whether or not this is true and will let everyone know how it goes. We at BeOpen want GPL-compatibility and have pushed for that since we started with any Python licensing issues.
  3. /Not/ BeOS! by Denor · · Score: 2 · on BeOpen Interview with Hans Reiser of ReiserFS

    I've seen a few comments that link this interview with BeOS. As far as I can tell from a cursory look at the homepage BeOpen has nothing to do with BeOS. They just have similar names.
    Recall from an earlier slashdot article that BeOpen is the place that the python folks moved to.
    Hope this clears up the confusion I had when I first saw the story and thought "What's Hans Reiser have to do with BeOS?"

  4. I'm tired by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0 · on Caldera Systems Files For IPO

    Please, stop announcing news about all IPOs. Or you're all trying to be good guys supporting it? BTW, the next IPO will be... BeOpen. They're like Andover.Net selling some sites...