Slashdot Mirror
XFree86 4.4: List of Rejecting Distributors Grows
Bootsy Collins writes "Yesterday, we
discussed
Mandrake's
decision to
revert their release-in-development from XFree86 version 4.4 back to version 4.3 because of issues with the
new XFree86 license.
To update this, the list of OS distributors opting out of
XF86 Version 4.4, and future releases, based on licensing concerns continues to grow.
While Fedora seems to be
"preparing to support multiple X11 implementations",
Red Hat has explicitly stated
that they have no plans to ship XFree86 v4.4
under its current license. Also add to the growing list
list
Debian,
Gentoo,
and OpenBSD."
I guess they don't get the advantage of the new versions. This Open Source Cognitive Dissonance will not stand!
"Why is the new liscence being rejected?"
From an exhaustive reading of the previous thread on this issue, well, er, because GPL zealots are throwing a hissy fit tantrum over nothing.
I suppose that the question here is: why?
Oh, come on. It's been extensively discussed in the previous Slashdot story linked to above. Do you really need to be spoon-fed your information like a little kid?
Not everyone has time to go back and research everything ever talked about dumbass.
Why do we even care about licensing?
At my company, we just take open source and do what we want with it. Who is going to complain? No one, open source has no monied interest behind it to enforce licensing terms.
We just compile it in as our own and then don't tell anybody.
The GPL and other licenses like it are just paper tigers.
But the FreeDesktop libraries will be LGPL whish is much much worse, because then we will have ZERO comertial applications.
Free software faggots probably wont mind, but for those of us who work for a living the FreeDesktop initiative is really worrysome.
Yeah, because as we all know Gentoo is Linux and if it isn't supporting it then nothing will.
I said "Correct me if I am wrong" Well, thanks for pointing out how "WRONG" I am, now correct me genius.
This is a summary, not a quote. I am describing the effect - please enlighten us as to what it REALLY says - or STFU.
"Labeling this as informative shows just how careful people read what they comment about."
All you did was say I was wrong - what is informative about that corky? Make it informative, tell us - several people have posted questions about the license - answer ONE - or STFU.
ymmv
WTF? How is requiring people who use your code to acknowledge that they use your code trying to make your software the next microsoft?
T Money
World Domination with a plastic spoon since 1984
How's that ATI support working for you?
greaaaaat, now i have to find a new linux distro, i was liking gentoo too.
fucking lame ass retarded fucking hippies.
gentoo devlopers, fuck it, include it you lame fucks!
Amen! Of course the new license isn't GPL compatible. That's obvious from the story headline! Moderators, get a fuckin' clue! If somebody posts information about why the license is incompatible, or what changed that is causing the incompatability, THAT would be insightful or informative. Stating the obvious is neither and you deserve to be bitch slapped in metamods for moderating it as such.
It makes the whole community look foolish. In a time when Linux needs to be making strides forward, new users are just going to see in-fighting over something about the latest version of the major GUI for Linux, something about its license...they'll just leave, not wanting to bother with it.
The real problem is that the GPL sucks. It's difficult to work with and anytime you tell people that they rattle off how it's really about "protecting freedom" instead of "restricting freedom", all the while explaining all these things you _can't_ do with the GPL.
It's asinine and the GPL should be avoided where at all possible. I wish it would just die and the idealogues who promote it would just go away.
It's called _XFree86_, not 'XFree'. Never has been called that, and never will. The 86 is part of the name, and omitting it makes you look like an illiterate newbie.
Sorry, but it does. Let's at least get some basic terminology right, eh?
You know what, fuck you asshole.
You ignored my first response you fucking coward, and I'll asume you'll do the same with this one.
I said this: "From what I understand - correct me if I am wrong"
The information was given to me and this is what I was lead to believe. So call me emotional, call me whatever, but I fully qualified my statement as possibly inaccurate and suggested it be corrected if not correct. Please don't misrepresent my statements and FUCKING CORRECT ME IF I AM WRONG.
ymmv
The problem with BSD, is not who is BSD-friendly, but the fact the BSD is Microsoft-friendly.
Microsoft can take BSD code and sell it to your grandmother for $199.99, and not put anywhere on there what code was used, so that when you are trying to get Grandma back on the net you can't help her without taking out a credit card to call the pay-for-support line.
If Microsoft chooses the distribute GPL code, they will have no choice but to put the code on the web or on the CD.
Don't write code for BSD, buy BSD t-shirts, or look too long at those pictures of the daemon babes. Force Microsoft to give your Grandma working software !
Oh, and the BSD license doesn't have the advertising clause in it anymore.
You're all flippin IDIOTS! Keep the issue clear. This is a GPL conflict only if you wanted to re-license the code with the GPL and redistribute it! This has nothing to do with programs linking to xlib! They're clearly NOT affected. They aren't re-distributing the Xfree code!!!
If you packaged up Xfree code and redistributed it with libfoo or whatever, you'd have to add/keep the notice in the end-user docs. I don't see how that's any different than if you distributed a whole linux distribution. If you make Xfree a part of the linux distribution, then the docs for the linux distribution (not libfoo) would have to include the attribution. Big flippin deal. That's not a whole lot of docs to change you flippin numbskulls!!!
out
Jokes aren't so funny when you have to explain them.
.. might have prompted a giggle. assuming if that is an actual quote.
"The latest 2.2 version of the Linux kernel is: 2.4.23" -- kernel.org
“Common sense is not so common.” — Voltaire