ant-user mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Peter Donald <>
Subject Re: licensing (was: Ant gui tool)
Date Thu, 12 Oct 2000 14:57:49 GMT
At 05:57  12/10/00 -0500, you wrote:
>The "fatal" line is:
> * 2. Redistributions in binary form must reproduce the above copyright
> *    notice, this list of conditions and the following disclaimer in
> *    the documentation and/or other materials provided with the
> *    distribution.
>It is fine alone, but suppose I used an Apache license for a GUI tool, and
>stipulated it must have another copyright line, with my name.  Then the
>user would see two copyright lines scrolling by.  Supposedly, NetBSD had
>75 lines.

I think it may have grown - some of those distributions have a hell of a
lot of junk tacked on. 

>I wish Gnu didn't use words like "fatal" and "annoying," it leads to
>fatally annoying flamewars.  People should be smarter than that, but it
>only takes one bad mood.

But GNU believes that ;)
I have been on both sides of fence (am GPL / LGPL for c/c++ - APL for java)
and I think I understand both sides. Both have merits and problems. GNU is
our "saviour" whether we want to be saved or not ;) - GNU used to see APL
as better than proprietry but only marginally. They actually used to
encourage people not to work on Apache software and I suspect they still
would discourage developers ;). Aparently they (or more specifically RMS)
see Apache as the good guys according to Apache members that have spoken to



| "Nearly all men can stand adversity, but if you want |
| to test a man's character, give him power."          |
|       -Abraham Lincoln                               |

View raw message