Re: License furor
|[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]|
i see a flak responded to you about x.org is going to put in _new_ features.
that'd be an improvement since they didn't do much for the first release ;-) if they are any good we
can take them and not have to attribute them because they don't believe in that. what comes around goes
X.Org has never said we don't believe in attribution, and would like to know ASAP if you find any code in X.Org that is not properly attributed.
XFree86 is welcome to incorporate X.Org features, just as they have been doing for over a decade with the releases from the previous organizations doing the main X11 releases. To do so, they just need to comply with the level of attribution required in the licenses in the code, which for most of the code mainly involves copying the copyright and license notices in with the code changes.
The only difference is, once XFree86 does so, they don't have to modify all their documentation and anywhere else they have attributions and have all the redistributors do so as well, to include a big notice that the code contains work from the X.Org Foundation.
Besides, if it's really devotion to proper attribution, shouldn't the XFree86 attribution statements say that XFree86 would never have existed if not for the original code released by the MIT X Consortium and that 90% of the code outside the DDX levels was originally from the X11 core releases?
-- -Alan Coopersmith- alan.coopersmith@xxxxxxx Sun Microsystems, Inc. - X Window System Engineering
_______________________________________________ Forum mailing list Forum@xxxxxxxxxxx http://XFree86.Org/mailman/listinfo/forum
[Photo] [Yosemite] [MIPS Linux] [ARM Linux] [Samba] [Linux Security] [Linux RAID] [Linux Resources]