jschauma writes "It appears that, unlike many other Open Source projects, NetBSD did not find any serious problems
with the much-debated license change of XFree86 4.4.0: it was just imported
into the tree."
Actually you wouldn't expect any of the Linux distros to have a problem either, since the XFree86 libraries are NOT under this new license. But I guess it's just too much fun waging holy wars...
-- Don't blame me, I didn't vote for either of them!
Apache fork? Why? The old Apache licences weren't GPL-compatible either. If that bothers you, you need to write a new webserver from scratch, not fork.
Slashdot Mirror
Actually you wouldn't expect any of the Linux distros to have a problem either, since the XFree86 libraries are NOT under this new license. But I guess it's just too much fun waging holy wars...
Don't blame me, I didn't vote for either of them!
Beyond that, it's indicative of an attitude and motivations that simply don't mesh well with what the community expects.
I certainly wouldn't mind seeing freedesktop.org replace the xfree86 project.
Compare Apache license in OpenBSD cvsweb with the XFree 86 4.4 license and clue me into what's the difference between these except for the organization name and URL?
Hmm... let's see if I got this right.
RMS is mad at the XFree86-people because they want some credits?
But's it's ok for RMS to force everyone and their mother to call linux for GNU/linux?
The reason for the bruhaha is nothing more than laziness on the part of the various distros.
Talk about far out in left field!!!
People are talking about backporting and forking and you believe such bruhaha is because they are simply lazy?
Who the hell moderated this up to 5 Informative?
You think coders are too lazy to print a single string?
Absurd.
War crimes, torture, lies, illegal spying... Would someone give Bush a blowjob, already, so he can be impeached?
Apache fork? Why? The old Apache licences weren't GPL-compatible either. If that bothers you, you need to write a new webserver from scratch, not fork.