It seems to have basically the same requirements as the GNU GPL, only expressed differently. However, code under this licence will not be compatible with GPLed code. I wonder why, therefore, they are not using a GPL-compatible licence.
When you say "soon", what do you mean? I don't see that happening for at least 50 years, which is not very long from a historical perspective perhaps, but certainly long to us mere mortals.
The UN has a difficult enough jobs as it is : being the government of the world is not trivial : let's concentrate on stopping bits of the world from fighting each other first.
I don't know about their powers, but I think the Wine license is more interesting to release the code under. And if they could forcibly cause release of source, surely they could order MS to buy lots of rights.:)
Um, what development tools are you using there. They seem quite disgusting. g++ here, gives me an executable that is 8,584 bytes for that program. (Well, not actually that program, but a very similar one, with a) angle brackets in some places;), and b) a "return 0;" statement at the end (to avoid demons flying out of my nose)).
Copyright law gives the FSF the right to do that, but the FSF's contracts with the people it buys copyright to GCC mods with would prohibit such actions, as far as I am aware. It's also probably against their consitution/whatever, and certainly against their principles.
Without any hard evidence, I think that the original accusor was trolling. (Yeah, right, like I'm going to buy a cell site in order to prove or disprove their point). My apologies if you weren't.
Please note that Cygnus isn't the maintainer of GCC. The GCC steering commitee is. This includes some Cygnus staff, yes, but the company is far from being in control.
In the very unlikely event that Cygnus/RHAT did bad things to gcc, no-one need accept them to maintainer : they can always maintain their own version. (The upside to forking : it keeps maintainers sane).
I thought cygwin was GPLed. How can you say its future is in doubt? In the unlikely event that it is abandoned by its maintainers, anyone who cares sufficiently can start maintaining it themselves : that's what the right to fork gives you.
As I see it, Taiwan only hasn't declared independence, because they are afraid of being invaded by the Mainland. Whilst they are still being a rebel province, and claiming to be the legitimate government of all China, they get to live. For evidence, look at the recent Taiwan/China conflict, when a Taiwanese politician suggested that the relations between Taiwan and China should be that of nationstate-to-nationstate.
Yep. You are misinterpreting the situation totally. There are several fatal flaws in your ramblings.
Not all open source licences are copylefts
You can quite easily dual-licence software under two different licenses
The real reason M$ won't licence any of their software under an open source licence, is quite mystifying. I guess it must be due to them all being evil borg, or something.
Slashdot Mirror
Cool, so it'll do standard CSS2, DHTML, and things like MathML? Excellent.
It seems to have basically the same requirements as the GNU GPL, only expressed differently. However, code under this licence will not be compatible with GPLed code. I wonder why, therefore, they are not using a GPL-compatible licence.
There are thousands of people doing just that.
Please explain what you mean by nonstandard. Do you consider ISO C, POSIX, the Single Unix Specification, etc, not to be standards?
The UN has a difficult enough jobs as it is : being the government of the world is not trivial : let's concentrate on stopping bits of the world from fighting each other first.
Yeah, theoretically. However, it's not maintained, and there will be no port to the axp for Win2K.
Also known as "printing support." ;)
I don't know about their powers, but I think the Wine license is more interesting to release the code under. And if they could forcibly cause release of source, surely they could order MS to buy lots of rights. :)
Um, what development tools are you using there. They seem quite disgusting. g++ here, gives me an executable that is 8,584 bytes for that program. (Well, not actually that program, but a very similar one, with a) angle brackets in some places ;), and b) a "return 0;" statement at the end (to avoid demons flying out of my nose)).
Without any hard evidence, I think that the original accusor was trolling. (Yeah, right, like I'm going to buy a cell site in order to prove or disprove their point). My apologies if you weren't.
In the very unlikely event that Cygnus/RHAT did bad things to gcc, no-one need accept them to maintainer : they can always maintain their own version. (The upside to forking : it keeps maintainers sane).
I thought cygwin was GPLed. How can you say its future is in doubt? In the unlikely event that it is abandoned by its maintainers, anyone who cares sufficiently can start maintaining it themselves : that's what the right to fork gives you.
As I see it, Taiwan only hasn't declared independence, because they are afraid of being invaded by the Mainland. Whilst they are still being a rebel province, and claiming to be the legitimate government of all China, they get to live. For evidence, look at the recent Taiwan/China conflict, when a Taiwanese politician suggested that the relations between Taiwan and China should be that of nationstate-to-nationstate.
And that no doubt helped hundreds of millions of people during the cold war, and those living in oppresive regimes today?
If you aren't doing that, stop whining.
The world does not revolve around the United States.
If he had an account then he wouldn't be able to astroturf.
If you want a guarantee, then I'd be happy to provide you with one for a very large fee indeed. ;)
Hint : proving the reliability of large software systems is as close to impossible as anything.
The real reason M$ won't licence any of their software under an open source licence, is quite mystifying. I guess it must be due to them all being evil borg, or something.
No. The soviets were totalitarianists who payed only lip service to the concepts of socialism/communism.
Freeciv is far from lame. Have you seen it? Get a clue, please.
Um, no. That would be a stupid thing to do. You obviously don't "get it". Royalty-free is an important concept of Open Source.
Can you get support from cheapbytes and do you get a printed manual? Do you get all 3 CDs?
Wow, that sounds remarkably like corporate murder. Do you have a link for that?
wParam, anyone?