DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; c=nofws; d=sourceware.org; h=list-id
	:list-unsubscribe:list-subscribe:list-archive:list-post
	:list-help:sender:date:from:to:subject:message-id:reply-to
	:references:mime-version:content-type:in-reply-to; q=dns; s=
	default; b=mJbc2oTFlZ2Bor8ROzfRHFpFaF9F+ldZp2Uyw7Lwe78kvSw53z4ZC
	Nkmp4rJJeQJt+A4Wcb5xPnW2TYpunn1yWn+ZvBm2KXRJsngwU0Fff50g4esz02sJ
	168mVET9G8GTgkK7sRNzbmG4mJakhGJBSW5Z0MalphZFGpLfd/XEWQ=
Mailing-List: contact cygwin-help@cygwin.com; run by ezmlm
Sender: cygwin-owner@cygwin.com
Mail-Followup-To: cygwin@cygwin.com
Date: Sat, 12 Apr 2014 12:55:53 -0400
From: Christopher Faylor <cgf-use-the-mailinglist-please@cygwin.com>
To: cygwin@cygwin.com
Subject: Re: We need steenking patches (Re: Cygwin kill utility...)
Message-ID: <20140412165553.GA4655@ednor.casa.cgf.cx>
Reply-To: cygwin@cygwin.com
Mail-Followup-To: cygwin@cygwin.com
References: <20140409055117.GA1878@ednor.casa.cgf.cx> <CAAXzdLXxAnB0JYHuvJj44ZAT=Uc-G12Xt+xsirnmiPBkOJ4U-w@mail.gmail.com> <53457A4C.1050104@etr-usa.com> <20140409170517.GA6319@ednor.casa.cgf.cx> <53472600.7050008@lysator.liu.se> <20140411021742.GA6242@ednor.casa.cgf.cx> <53479351.4050703@lysator.liu.se> <20140411121042.GB23281@calimero.vinschen.de> <20140411170931.GA7818@ednor.casa.cgf.cx> <20140412144624.GE3271@calimero.vinschen.de>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Disposition: inline
In-Reply-To: <20140412144624.GE3271@calimero.vinschen.de>
User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.20 (2009-06-14)

On Sat, Apr 12, 2014 at 04:46:24PM +0200, Corinna Vinschen wrote:
>On Apr 11 13:09, Christopher Faylor wrote:
>> On Fri, Apr 11, 2014 at 02:10:42PM +0200, Corinna Vinschen wrote:
>> >On Apr 11 09:01, Peter Rosin wrote:
>> >>The newlib license is liberal enough for RedHat to relicense it under
>> >>their own terms?
>> >
>> >That's it, more or less.
>> 
>> I have never seen how you can have it both ways, legally speaking.  I
>> was told not to worry about it when I was at Red Hat but no one ever
>> gave me a convincing explanation.  Since there are no assignments in
>> newlib land, it just relies on BSD-like licensing.  I don't see why
>> Cygwin can't do the same.
>
>BTAT in 2011.  IANAL, but the reason is the buyout clause which,
>apparently, requires a certain amount of red tape while, incidentally,
>funds a non-trivial amount of the time I can spend on Cygwin.
>
>I'm just curious why you never asked the question while you were still
>working at Red Hat.  Anyway, I asked again.  Times change so procedures
>might change as well.

"I was told not to worry about it"

[rest of long rant snipped]

cgf

--
Problem reports:       http://cygwin.com/problems.html
FAQ:                   http://cygwin.com/faq/
Documentation:         http://cygwin.com/docs.html
Unsubscribe info:      http://cygwin.com/ml/#unsubscribe-simple