Re: [XFree86] Announcement: Modification to the base XFree86(TM) license.

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

On Mon, 2 Feb 2004, georgina wrote:

> You know that's a funny comment.  I was over at the site reading their
> mail haphazardly and one of the great comments came from Stu Anderson ala
> the XC, XF86 core, Metrolink and more recently netSweng and, where he
> said, and sadly I paraphrase, That this would have the effect of us forking
> ourselves!

Please don't paraphrase. It completely changes the statement, and just
introduces more inaccuracy and ill will into this situation.

The exact quote is:

  It looks like it has an impact on importing this new version of the code
  into the X.Org tree and modular trees, effectively forcing a fork.

The context is that there are copies of the XFree86 tree to which additional
work is being done. Thus far, the methodology has been to keep these trees
in sync with the XFree86 tree to the extent possible.

The "forcing a fork" part of the comment was based on my prediction that many
people would have a problem with the additional requirement added to the
licenes, and that they would probably choose not to continue keeping the trees
in sync because of it. This in effect creates a permanent fork, instead of
a one off development tree as it is now.


Stuart R. Anderson                               anderson@xxxxxxxxxxxx
Network & Software Engineering         
1024D/37A79149:                                  0791 D3B8 9A4C 2CDC A31F
                                                 BD03 0A62 E534 37A7 9149
Forum mailing list

[X.Org]     [XFree86]     [XFree86 Discussion]     [XFree86 Newbie]     [IETF Annouce]     [Security]     [Bugtraq]     [Yosemite]     [MIPS Linux]     [ARM Linux]     [Samba]     [Linux Security]     [Linux RAID]     [Linux Resources]

  Powered by Linux