Skip to Content.
Sympa Menu

sm-discuss - Re: [SM-Discuss] license of xfree86

sm-discuss AT lists.ibiblio.org

Subject: Public SourceMage Discussion List

List archive

Chronological Thread  
  • From: Casey Harkins <charkins AT upl.cs.wisc.edu>
  • To: Hamish Greig <hgreig AT bigpond.net.au>
  • Cc: sm-discuss AT lists.ibiblio.org
  • Subject: Re: [SM-Discuss] license of xfree86
  • Date: Sat, 21 Feb 2004 00:33:49 -0600 (CST)


On Sat, 21 Feb 2004, Hamish Greig wrote:

> On Sat, 21 Feb 2004 04:55, Eric Sandall wrote:
> > The current xfree86-devel is okay, yes? If so, then we just leave it as is
> > and not update it anymore. We don't even need to make a non-free X spell,
> > as why should we support it? That'd add a little more pressure.
> >
> > -sandalle
>
> xfree86-devel in devel repo is WIP and has been updated to the version that
> has the new license.
> Casey's point about client side libraries being excluded from the 1.1
> license
> and still only using 1.0 license is likely correct, but that is the point
> everyone else is debating still so there must be some catch to it.
>

Agreed, that does seem to still be a point of debate.

As Schabell pointed out, there seems to be a consensus here to reject the
new license. So the current xfree86 and xfree86-devel spells should be
frozen at their current versions. Perhaps there should be a news item
posted on the website indicating the decision?

If future versions of xfree86 are to be included, they should go into
z-rejected, with new names. Maybe something along the lines of:

xfree86-containing-software-developed-by-the-XFree86-Project-Inc
xfree86-containing-software-developed-by-the-XFree86-Project-Inc-devel

So anyone try using freedesktop.org's X libraries yet?

-casey





Archive powered by MHonArc 2.6.24.

Top of Page