Just thought I'd toss out a correction, because lots of statements are being made by people who don't know much about the whys and wherefores of the recent UCB announcement of a GPL'ed release or how we got here.
The license, and the manner in which the distro is being managed, were specified by Alcatel-Lucent. UCB graciously agreed to take on the role they have taken on. This was not a small effort on either side. Folks at Bell Labs (and me) put in a lot of time over the last 2 quarters to try to find a way to fix a problem, namely, that the LPL has been off-putting for many potential users, only in part because it is incompatible with the GPL. We sought a more standard license. It was not easy. The LPL could not be made compatible with the GPL in finite time. Yes, the web pages all mention one clause; I found out the hard way that was only *one* issue. There are many more. I would certainly hope that people can use this distro as a basis for further work. I think Alcatel-Lucent, UC Berkeley, and Jim McKie are owed much thanks for their willingness to revisit this issue, and their persistence in achieving the outcome. ron
