Slashdot Mirror


XFree86 4.4 Released

puriots0 writes "XFree86 version 4.4 is finally out! Grab it while it's still hot, if you don't mind the recent licensing changes... And if you don't care about the license, but the maintainers of your distribution do, this might be the only way to get it for the moment." The XFree86 people seem very eager to claim that the new license is nothing bad; see their FAQ. However, people who have reviewed it, such as RMS and Branden Robinson, think differently. It looks as if the XFree86 people have a short timespan to either rethink their license changes or be dropped from every/almost every Linux distribution in favor of a forked codebase.

8 of 531 comments (clear)

  1. From the FAQ by Space+cowboy · · Score: 5, Interesting

    What about GPL-compatibility?

    The 1.1 license is not GPL-compatible. To avoid new issues with application programs that may be licensed under the GPL, the 1.1 licence is not being applied to client side libraries.


    So, it seems that the main reason for a fork is no longer an issue ? No-one is going to be writing a new X-Server (well, I guess some of the embedded folks might, but that's about all I can think of), and they state that there's no issues with any client programs that you link with ... No problem for most of us then, unless it's for political reasons.

    My position is that if you write/own the code you get to say how it's used. I don't think there's *any* argument against that, and I can see why they want to promote themselves in this world where perception is all. The issue is that all decisions have consequences - which may be why client-programs are not part of the deal :-) I seriously doubt that XFree86 *want* a code fork, and I think that freedesktop.org will give them a serious run for their money if the fork goes ahead.

    I wonder if the forking argument itself (please say that correctly :-) has gathered sufficient momentum to cause the predicted split though - that would be a pity if so. For all that KDE and Gnome are competing desktops, and they have both co-evolved to their benefit over time, I think two competing windowing-system standards might have a harder time co-evolving... If they didn't, you'd have to wonder why there were 2 in the first place!

    Simon.

    --
    Physicists get Hadrons!
    1. Re:From the FAQ by Nuclear+Elephant · · Score: 5, Interesting

      No-one is going to be writing a new X-Server

      On the contrary, FreeDesktop.org is writing one, and it's A. much more promising (supports some neat things too like drop shadows and translucent menus), and B. based on the original XFree86 libraries.

  2. What other alternatives? by brainkiller · · Score: 5, Interesting

    What other alternatives are there to Xfree?

  3. Xserver by MooKore+2004 · · Score: 5, Interesting

    Maybe its time to get more people looking at Xserver?

  4. Question by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Interesting

    The XF86 project is distributing the 4.4 code under only the new license.

    Have any of the individual XF86 *contributors* come forward and said their portions of 4.4 may be used under the previous license at the user's option?

  5. Oh REALLY?!?!? by ZuperDee · · Score: 5, Interesting

    It looks as if the XFree86 people have a short timespan to either rethink their license changes or be dropped from every/almost every Linux distribution in favor of a forked codebase.

    Am I the only one here who thinks it is possible that license change or not, some distributions are getting ready to dump XFree86 in ANY case, due to the other problems it has, like the general arrogance of the core developers, and the lack of a truly open development community, which is largely their doing?

    Seriously, I don't think the license change is the major reason, but simply the right occasion for dumping XFree86. Even if they were to revert the license change tomorrow, I for one would still favor seeing forks like Freedesktop.org's server make it into distros, because I believe the license change is only one of MANY indications that XFree86 has far deeper problems that I'm not so sure can be fixed so easily. Just like many organizations and projects in real life, the PEOPLE behind the project are the greatest asset, and I think the XFree86 core team has failed to recognize this. Unless the core team gets a total attitude makeover, I doubt this will ever change.

  6. Remember XFree... by sla291 · · Score: 5, Interesting

    XFree is dying, maybe.

    Most say that it sucks. I say it's not perfect but check this website : http://www.lynucs.org/

    and you'll see that X can really make your desktop very eye-candy. (well, perhaps you already knew ;)

    Don't blame XFree too much.. we're pretty all using it, even it may be the time to move on.

  7. Re:From the FAQ (re GPL + APL-2.0) by H4x0r+Jim+Duggan · · Score: 5, Interesting

    I'm not sure, but I think the Apache 2.0 license has been revised further to make it more clear that it is GNU GPL compatible

    Unfortunately not. Instead of fixing the problem, the Apache group made a public statement to say that the incompatibility doesn't exist. - The problem arose from the press release of the Apache License-2.0, in which they gave "GPL compatibility" as a justification for the new license. Note that if you combine a GPL'd and an APL'd work, it's the GPL'd works license that is infringed, so the decision isn't up to the Apache group. The Apache guys might need a good clothes line.

    From FSF's license list: The Apache Software License, version 2.0: This is a free software license but it is incompatible with the GPL. The Apache Software License is incompatible with the GPL because it has a specific requirement that is not in the GPL: it has certain patent termination cases that the GPL does not require. (We don't think those patent termination cases are inherently a bad idea, but nonetheless they are incompatible with the GNU GPL.)