Message-Id:	<4.3.2.7.0.20000916183750.00c377a0@mail.subdimension.com>
X-Sender:	matt DOT l AT mail DOT subdimension DOT com
X-Mailer:	QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Version 4.3.2
Date:	Sat, 16 Sep 2000 18:46:07 -0700
To:	djgpp AT delorie DOT com
From:	Matt Lewandowsky <matt DOT l AT techie DOT com>
Subject:	Re: The Future of DJGPP
In-Reply-To:	<MPG.142daa34c3ae0e5598968a@news.newsguy.com>
References:	<967904615 DOT 832712 AT shelley DOT paradise DOT net DOT nz>
	<8t32rsodgkia3rk2rok5fn57vcgta55nc5 AT 4ax DOT com>
	<jv82rscrkqsat4n86qua8077i0hpbfbhno AT 4ax DOT com>
	<gka2rso7b2hk6ejgrtlfo4q1giormmh742 AT 4ax DOT com>
Mime-Version:	1.0
Reply-To:	djgpp AT delorie DOT com
Errors-To:	nobody AT delorie DOT com
X-Mailing-List:	djgpp AT delorie DOT com
X-Unsubscribes-To:	listserv AT delorie DOT com

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1

At 14.04 09/16/2000, Kendall Bennett wrote:
>I am coming in late on this one ;-)

Same here... ;)

>In article <gka2rso7b2hk6ejgrtlfo4q1giormmh742 AT 4ax DOT com>,
>Bullcr_pd_yerrick AT hotmail DOT comRemoveBullcr_p says...
>
> > >moderately good help (easy to find what you want, assuming it's
> > >there), excellent code generator, it will also be open source.
> >
> > But will it be truly Free?  Some so-called "open source" software
> > isn't.
>
>Oh it will be truly free. Sybase realises this is important because I
>drummed it into their brains when we discussed this early in the piece.
>Whatever licese they choose (which likely will be one dreamed up by
>their laywers), it will pass the guidlines on OpenSource.org and will be
>sanctioned by them.
>
>If I get my way I want to see the core compiler and utilities all under
>a GPL license, with the C/C++ runtime libraries under a Mozilla Public
>License type license (or perhaps BSX/MIT license). Because of Watcom's
>proprietry background, LGPL licensing for the C/C++ runtime libraries
>will cause major headaches for existing users of the product.

Hmmm... IIRC, the FSF has issues with OpenSource.org since it is possible 
to make non-free (as in beer) licenses still. Just because you give source, 
it doesn't mean that you can't retain complete control over it. Think of 
the old Unix source code licenses. (Pre-BSD...) Also, more recently Apple's 
Open Source License. Apple's license said something along the lines of you 
can't even modify the source for your own use. (I think that's correct. I 
disiked the license. But it was far overly restrictive. Even if they 
abandoned the program they still owned the source and all patches submitted 
by anyone. And no one could use it.)

Make it FSF-compatible, and it will keep everyone happy. :) But BSD's 
license isn't bad IMHO. It's worked for a long time now. And why would 
Lesser GPL licensing be bad? It allows distribution without source in a 
commercial environment. (PLEASE correct me if I'm incorrect there.)

But it's nice to see that Sybase is seeing the light finally.

- --Matt
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: PGPfreeware 6.5.3 for non-commercial use <http://www.pgp.com>

iQA/AwUBOcQiX+oMko8dOmunEQJR7ACgvd9GE6ldN+00UdRELninauHPT5cAn1m4
3X0xh+xM9fSMywbR0Cmfmobh
=/1R2
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----

- Raw text -