On Wed, Mar 31, 2004 at 04:47:04PM -0500, William Hooper wrote:
T. Ribbrock said:
> On Sat, Mar 27, 2004 at 03:03:13PM +0000, Paul Thomas wrote:
>> Yes, I'm sure you're right. The crazy thing from my point of view is
>> that
>> the XFree86 1.1 license is virtually identical to the Apache license.
> The new or the old one? Apache has been forked as well e.g. by
OpenBSD,
Link please. The only thing I see on OpenBSD's web page is that
they
Chroot httpd.
From the man himself:
http://marc.theaimsgroup.com/?l=openbsd-misc&m=107714762916291&w=2
You might also want to have a look at the ensuing thread that follow
that message.
> as Apache's licence has been changed for the worse as well.
With respect to GPL compatibility Apache's license hasn't
changed. It
never has been GPL compatible.
The problem is that the old licence was reasonably understandable,
whereas the new licence can only be understood with the help of a
lawyer. In my opinion, this is a clear change for the worse.
Cheerio,
Thomas
--
===> Netiquette - read it, use it:
http://www.faqs.org/rfcs/rfc1855.html <===
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------
Thomas Ribbrock
http://www.ribbrock.org
"You have to live on the edge of reality - to make your dreams come true!"